JJ Act Overrides Muslim Personal Law; Adoption Deed Alone Can’t Confer Legal Parentage: Madras High Court
Court held that adoptions among Muslims must follow the statutory route under the Juvenile Justice Act, and personal law concepts like kafala cannot override the legal framework designed to protect child welfare
The Madras High Court clarifies Muslim adoption procedure under the Juvenile Justice Act
The Madras High Court at Madurai Bench has held that Muslims cannot adopt a child merely by executing and registering an adoption deed, as Islamic law does not recognise such a practice. Instead, adoption must be carried out strictly in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and the Adoption Regulations, 2022.
The bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan held thus while disposing of a petition filed by K. Heerajohn, a Muslim man from Madurai, who sought a direction to the Sub-Registrar at Melur East to register an adoption deed executed by him and his wife, Kadhan Beevi, for adopting their nephew, Mohammed Saleem, aged eight. The boy’s mother, Amjad Beevi, who is the petitioner’s widowed sister-in-law, had consented to the adoption.
The Sub-Registrar had declined to register the document, citing that Islamic personal law does not recognise adoption. Challenging this, Heerajohn approached the court seeking a mandamus to compel registration of the deed.
The petitioner relied on an earlier decision of the Madras High Court in N. Faritha Begam v. Joint Registrar No.2, Kallakurichi (2022), which had permitted registration of a similar adoption deed by invoking the JJ Act. However, Justice Swaminathan said he could not agree with that judgment, noting that it was based on the repealed Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, whereas the 2015 version enacted through Central Act 2 of 2016 now governs adoptions.
The judge observed that Section 56(2) of the JJ Act, 2015, specifically allows adoption of a relative’s child by another relative irrespective of religion, provided the procedure under the Act and accompanying regulations is followed. Under the Adoption Regulations, 2022, such adoptions must be processed through the District Child Protection Unit (DCPU), verified, and approved by the District Magistrate, who alone can issue the adoption order.
Once such an order is issued, the child is deemed under Section 63 of the Act to become the child of the adoptive parents “as if born to them biologically,” with full rights in inheritance and status. The judge held that registration of an adoption deed is unnecessary once the adoption order is passed by the District Magistrate.
While declining to issue the mandamus sought, Justice Swaminathan permitted the petitioner to adopt the prescribed procedure under the JJ Act, directing the DCPU to complete verification within three weeks of receiving the application and the District Magistrate to decide within another three weeks. He emphasised that officials must ensure a “hassle-free process” for prospective adoptive parents.
The judge also referred to a recent editorial in The Hindu lamenting long waiting periods and procedural bottlenecks in India’s adoption system. Observing that “as many as 13 prospective parents are waiting for every single child declared legally free for adoption,” he underscored that delays deny children a nurturing environment and stable homes during their formative years.
“Right to adopt may not yet be recognised as a fundamental right under Article 21, but it is certainly a human right,” Justice Swaminathan remarked, urging authorities to expedite adoptions to serve the welfare of children.
Case Title: K.Heerajohn vs The District Registrar, Madurai District and Another
Order Date: October 17, 2025
Bench: Justice G.R. Swaminathan