Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Seeking Speedy Adoption, Foster Care And Sponsorship

The Supreme Court, on Monday, issued notice in a petition, inter alia, seeking guidelines for timely and speedy action by stakeholders under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act) to secure rights of children in need of care and protection, primarily, in relation to adoption, foster care and sponsorship.

A Bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Hima Kohli tagged the present petition with another similar matter seeking simplification of the process of adoption.

The petition raises concerns pertaining to -

1. Declining rate of adoption in India;
2. Shortcomings and revamping of Adoption Laws as recommended by Parliament Standing Committee Report;
3. Protection, care and adoption of children, especially those with special needs;
4. Foster Care is non-existent in India;
5. No proper system for implementation of sponsorship;
6. Allocation of budget and resources.

Declining rate of adoption in India

As per date available in 2020, 8.5% of the total children in India are orphaned or abandoned, whereas only 0.0009% of the children are given for adoption in a particular year. Referring to an affidavit filed by the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) before the Apex Court, in a suo moto proceeding, the petition submits that between April, 2020 and January, 2022, 10,094 children were orphaned, 1,36,910 children have lost either parent and 488 children are abandoned after the Covid-19 outbreak. On the backdrop of the increase in the number of orphans it argues that the same has not affected the 'meagre' rate of adoption under the JJ Act, which for the year 2021-22 was only 2291.

Shortcomings and revamping of Adoption Laws as recommended by Parliamentary Standing Committee Report

The petition submits that the 118th Report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on 'Review of Guardianship and Adoption Laws', presented before the Parliament on 08.08.2022 identified shortcomings in the adoption laws and recommended restructuring of the same to make it 'uniform', 'transparent' and 'less bureaucratic'. It also suggested harmonising the JJ Act and the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA).

Protection, care and adoption of children, especially those with special needs

In July 2022, out of the 1858 children available for adoption, 1265 were children with special needs. The petition emphasises that the proportion of children with special needs available for adoption have increased from 51% in 2018 to 68% in 2022. It submits that 'adoption agencies are increasingly becoming dumping grounds for children with special needs, that neither their families nor the prospective adoptive parents wish to care for'.

Foster Care is non-existent in India

The petition argues that even though Section 44 of the JJ Act provides for foster care, the scheme is not implemented. Moreover, unlike CARA, which acted as a nodal authority for regulating and monitoring adoption, there is no such single authority for monitoring foster care.

No proper system for implementation of sponsorship

The petition claims that the sponsorship scheme elucidated in Section 45 of the JJ Act is not being implemented in its true spirit. The scheme aims to provide for medical, nutritional, educational, and other needs of children and would go a long way in improving their quality of life if implemented properly.

Allocation of budget and resources

As per the petition, in the Union Budget for the financial year 2021-22, Child Protection Services and Child Welfare Services were merged into Mission Vatsalya. It received a total budget of Rs 900 crore. Out of the said budget only Rs.821 crore was actually disbursed for the period 2021-22. In the financial year 2022-2023, the budget allocation for Mission Vatsalya has been increased to Rs. 1472 crores. The petition submits that it is crucial to ascertain the budgetary requirement to ensure proper care and protection of children in need and allocate the same efficaciously.

The present petition was argued by Advocates, Mr. Roshan Shah, Mr. Alok Yadav and it was filed through Advocate-on-Record, Mr. Vishnu Kant.

[Case Status: Srisabarirajan v. UOI & Ors W.P.(C) No. 719/2022]