1 Adoption : Law does not recognise an
adoption by a Hindu of any person other than a Hindu: Hindu Adoption &
Maintenance Act, 1956, S. 6.
The petitioner Kumar Sursen, who was then a minor had filed
the petition for grant of caste certificate and residential certificate on basis
that he was the adopted son of Kamal Prasad Roy and was residing with him at
village Madarpur in the district of Vaishali. The district authorities had
dismissed the petition, on the ground that the petitioner was in fact a Muslim
boy named Sahadat and is the natural son of Majid Mian and Ayesha Khatoon. The
petitioner’s case was that he was adopted by Kamal Prasad Roy. The said Kamal
Prasad Roy does not dispute the above fact. He, accordingly, wanted this boy to
have this caste and his residential certificates.
The Patna High Court held that under the Hindu Adoption and
Maintenance Act, 1956, S. 6 thereof permits adoption by a Hindu of a Hindu child
alone. Law does not recognise an adoption by a Hindu of any person other than a
Hindu. If that be so, the adoption, as sought to be done in respect of the
petitioner by Kamal Prasad Roy, has no legal sanctity, though it may be morally
binding between the parties. If that be so, then unfortunately the boy cannot
get the caste certificate of his alleged adoptive parents. Similarly, he cannot
get a residential certificate and both cannot be granted in his name showing him
son of Kamal Prasad Roy.
Writ application was dismissed, as such giving liberty to the
petitioner or his alleged adoptive parents to approach for grant of requisite
certificate.
[ Kumar Sursen v. State of Bihar & Ors., AIR 2008
Patna 24]