DARSHANA GUPTA Vs. NONE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This legal battle is unique wherein appellant is not pitted against any opponent much less formidable opponent. Appellant, Ms. Darshana Gupta, has laid this appeal under Section 52 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short, 'Act of 2000') read with Order 43 rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'CPC') to assail the impugned order dated 18th December 2014, passed by learned District Judge, Udaipur (for short, 'learned Court below).

(2.) By the order impugned, endeavour made by the appellant in unison with proforma respondent Rajkiya Balika Garh/Visheshak Dattak Garhn Agency, Bal Adhikarita Vibhag, under Section 9 (4 & 5) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for short, 'Act of 1956') read with Section 41 of the Act of 2000, to adopt a minor girl, Priti, proved abortive inasmuch as the learned Court below declined her prayer by citing embargo envisaged in clause (ii) of Section 11 of the Act of 1956, under the caption "Other conditions for a valid adoption".

(3.) Succinctly stated, the facts of the case are that the appellant is presently working as Joint Director, Pension Department having her posting at Udaipur. She made endeavour to adopt minor girl Priti, and for that purpose she invoked provisions of Section 9(4) & (5) of the Act of 1956 read with Section 41 of the Act of 2000 by submitting a joint application before the learned Court below. This effort was made by the appellant seeking declaration for adoption of the minor child. Along with her application, appellant also annexed an affidavit claiming, inter-alia, that she moved an application for adopting minor girl Priti before the co-applicant, which is now a proforma respondent. In her application, material particulars about registration of the minor girl were also incorporated. Facts were also pleaded in the application that the Board of the proforma respondent found her entitled for adoption of minor girl Priti w.e.f. 6 th of June 2014 and since then Priti is in custody and guardianship of the appellant. The requisite documents, pertaining to decision of the Board dated 06.06.2014 as well as custody and guardianship of the minor child, were also submitted before the learned Court below. With all humility at her command, the appellant made endeavour to seek declaration and permission from the learned Court below for adopting the minor girl. For substantiating her intention to adopt minor girl Priti, appellant also appeared in the witness box and proved all the documents. In all, during her examination, six documents were exhibited. After conclusion of the evidence, the learned Court below thrashed out the matter and rejected the application by the impugned order.