The Madras High Court has appointed a Hindu couple as the legal guardians of a Muslim minor girl, emphasizing that the welfare of the child is of paramount importance, surpassing religious considerations. The decision came in an appeal against a family court order that had dismissed the couple's petition for guardianship.
Background of the Case
The appellant, a Hindu man, married his wife in 2012. The couple, unable to have children, decided to adopt a child. A Muslim woman, a daily wage worker who had known them for over a decade, had three children. Her third child, a daughter, was born in 2023. After her husband's death, the biological mother struggled to provide basic necessities for her children and willingly offered her youngest daughter for adoption to the appellant and his wife. The couple has been caring for the child since birth.
Family Court's Decision
The appellant filed a petition before the family court in Madurai seeking to be appointed as the legal guardian of the minor child until she attains majority. The family court dismissed the petition, citing that the child was a girl and the appellant and his wife were strangers. However, the court conceded that a non-Muslim could be appointed as a guardian.
High Court's Observations
A division bench comprising Justice N Anand Venkatesh and Justice K K Ramakrishnan heard the appeal. The bench noted that the child has been cared for solely by the appellant and his wife since birth. The child addresses them as father and mother, while referring to her biological mother as aunt. The biological mother has also given her full consent for the appellant to be appointed as guardian.
Legal Framework
The judges observed that the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, is religion-neutral and applies to all persons seeking guardianship. Religion is only one of the considerations under Section 17 of the Act, which requires the court to consider the welfare of the child as the primary factor. Other factors include the age, sex, and religion of the minor, as well as the character and capacity of the proposed guardian. The court must strike a balance between the sentiments of the parties and the child's welfare, with the latter being of paramount importance.
Parents Patriae Jurisdiction
The bench noted that the appellant's right to be appointed as guardian is recognized under the Act. In exercising its parents patriae jurisdiction, the court must act in the best interest of the child. Since the child identifies the appellant and his wife as her parents and has been under their care since birth, appointing the appellant as legal guardian serves the child's welfare.
Final Order
The judges stated, “The court is satisfied with the credentials of the appellant and his wife and is also satisfied that the consent has been given by the biological mother wholeheartedly.” Setting aside the family court's order, the High Court appointed the appellant as the legal guardian of the minor child.
