APPOINTMENT OF PERSON OF A MALE MINOR VARAD Vs. HARALD HAMRE AND ELIN AASLAND HAMRE NORWEGIAN NATIONALS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition along with several other petitions was posted for hearing on a common issue which arose therein. The issue is, what is the power of this Court to appoint a foreign guardian, in respect of infants, where temporary guardianship was granted in terms of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. As the matter was not covered by any reported judgment and involved a large number of children in respect of whom petitions were pending in this Court, notice was issued amongst others to the learned Advocate General of the State of Maharashtra. Various organizations including ICSW, Counsel generally appearing in these matters were heard and their views have been considered.

(2.) THE facts in the present petition are only been set out as they will be sufficient for the purpose of disposing of the issue in controversy.

(3.) EXERCISE of jurisdiction in matters of guardianship is limited in those cases where the child ordinarily resides. This is the interpretation given by this Court in the judgment of Lentin J., in the case of Giovanni Marco Muzzu and etc. etc. A.I.R. 1983 Bom. 242. While considering applications under Clause 17 of the Letters Patent and the Guardians and Wards Act the attention of this Court was drawn to a large number of minors being brought to the State from outside and thereafter sent for foreign adoption. It is in these circumstances that a learned Single Judge of this Court was pleased to hold, that this Court would not have, where minors are brought only for the purpose of being sent for foreign adoption, jurisdiction under clause 17 read with Section 3 of the Guardians and Wards Act. In such cases it would be the Court where the child ordinarily resides which would have jurisdiction. In other words the territorial jurisdiction of this Court will be restricted to those cases where the minors ordinarily reside within the State of Maharashtra.