The Delhi High Court has directed the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for a minor child adopted under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA), after completion of verification by the concerned District Magistrate. The Court held that the case was covered by earlier decisions dealing with similar adoption issues involving Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) parents residing in Australia.
Justice Sachin Datta passed the order on July 1, 2026, while deciding a petition filed on behalf of minor child Karnika Khandelwal through her adoptive parents, Abhinav Khandelwal and Hema Pandey.
Background of the Case
According to the petition, Karnika Khandelwal was born on June 20, 2023, and was adopted by the petitioners under Hindu customs on June 27, 2023. The adoptive parents are Indian-origin Australian citizens and Overseas Citizens of India. An adoption deed was later executed under HAMA on March 5, 2024, and a birth certificate naming the adoptive parents was subsequently issued.
In March 2025, the adoptive parents applied through CARA's online portal seeking a No Objection Certificate and a Conformity Certificate required for the child's immigration process. However, CARA rejected the request, stating that the application did not comply with Regulation 68 of the Adoption Regulations, 2022, which requires sponsorship from the Central Authority or an Authorised Foreign Adoption Agency in the receiving country.
Take CourtBook Everywhere
Access your account on the go with our mobile app.
The petitioners argued that compliance with this requirement was impossible because Australian authorities do not process HAMA adoptions from India under their inter-country adoption programme. Instead, Australian authorities classify such cases as "expatriate adoptions," making it impossible to obtain the sponsorship letter demanded by CARA.
Court's Observations
During the hearing, the Court examined an email issued by the Australian Government stating that HAMA adoptions completed privately are treated as expatriate adoptions and are not automatically recognised as inter-country adoptions under Australian law. The communication also clarified that the Australian Government's role is limited to deciding whether the child satisfies immigration requirements.
The petitioner relied on earlier judgments of the Bombay High Court and the Gujarat High Court, where courts had granted relief in similar circumstances involving HAMA adoptions by OCI parents residing in Australia. Those decisions recognised that strict compliance with Regulation 68 could not be insisted upon where Australian authorities themselves refused to process such adoptions under the inter-country adoption framework.
The respondents maintained that CARA's refusal was based solely on the absence of the mandatory sponsoring letter under Regulation 68. However, the Court noted that later communications from Australian authorities prescribed an alternative process under which CARA's support would be required after verification by the District Magistrate.
Significantly, both sides agreed that the facts of the present case were squarely covered by the earlier decisions of the Bombay and Gujarat High Courts.
Quoting its reasoning, the Court observed,
"The facts of the present case are squarely covered by the dicta of the Bombay High Court... and the Gujarat High Court."
Court's Decision
Following the earlier precedents, Justice Sachin Datta directed CARA to issue the required No Objection Certificate after the concerned District Magistrate conducts the prescribed inquiry and issues the verification certificate in the format required under Regulation 69 of the Adoption Regulations, 2022.
The Court also instructed the District Magistrate and CARA to expedite the entire process while keeping in view the welfare and future of the minor child.
With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of.
Case Details
Case Title: Ms. Karnika Khandelwal, Represented by Abhinav Khandelwal & Hema Pandey v. Union of India & Another
Case Number: W.P.(C) 13156/2025
Judge: Justice Sachin Datta
Decision Date: 1 July 2026
