ARUN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) This is a special appeal challenging an order dtd. 11/8/2025 passed by learned Single Judge in HABC writ petition bearing No.177/2025 [Ayesha through her mother Ragini and Anr. vs. State of U.P. and Ors.]. The petition was filed by respondent no.6 through her natural guardians and respondent nos.7 and 8. Learned Single Judge has allowed the claim of natural guardians i.e. opposite party no.s 7 and 8 to custody of opposite party no.6 and has rejected the stand of appellants herein on the ground that alleged adoption deed which is a notarized one is not registered whereas the law requires it to be registered.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon a judgment dtd. 5/5/2014 passed in special appeal no.236 of 2014 [Sanjay Kumar 3238 (S/S) of 2014 vs. State of U.P. and Ors.] to contend that in that case Sec. 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (in short 'the Act, 1956') as applicable in the State of U.P. was considered and it was held that compassionate appointment could not have denied prima facie merely on the ground that adoption deed was not registered one. According to the Coordinate Bench, U.P. amendment provides that additional evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 shall be admissible to defend any unregistered adoption deed. This is the only argument advanced for challenging the judgment of learned Single Judge.