Mahalakshmi Ananya K, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru, Karnataka
ABSTRACT
The judgment in Sandhya Kulkarni v. Union of India1, delivered by the Bombay High Court on September 9, 1997, remains a landmark ruling in the context of adoption laws in India. At its core, the case examined the constitutional validity of Section 11(i) and (ii) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 19562, which prohibits individuals from adopting a second child of the same gender if they already have a living biological or adopted child of that gender. The petitioners, who wished to adopt a girl despite already having a biological daughter, challenged these provisions on the grounds that they violated Articles 143 (right to equality) and Article 214 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Constitution. They argued that the law unfairly discriminated against adoptive parents and restricted their right to determine the size of their family, which they claimed was an integral part of the right to life and human dignity under Article 21.
While the court upheld the validity of the provisions, citing their alignment with Hindu religious and cultural traditions, the case raises critical questions about the intersection of personal laws, constitutional rights, and the welfare of children in contemporary India. In today’s context, where societal norms, family structures, and the needs of orphaned and destitute children have evolved significantly, it is imperative to revisit this judgment and analyze its relevance in light of modern legal, social, and ethical considerations.
Comments