DHARMENDRASINGH RAMSEVKAR RAJPUT & ANR. vs STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

This petition revolves around the predicament of

an innocent ten-year old girl, Laxmi, who, in spite of

having two sets of parents - biological and adoptive -

finds herself in the Childrens'' Home for Girls. The

petition brings to the fore the unseemly tussle

between the two sets of parents for Laxmi''s custody,

which question looms large before the Court. All

considerations apart, the Court is conscious that its

paramount duty is to ensure Laxmi''s welfare.

Now, the facts :

This Habeas Corpus petition under Article-226 of

the Constitution of India has been preferred by the

petitioners, who claim to be Laxmi''s adoptive parents.

A prayer is made to issue an appropriate Writ, order

or direction upon respondents Nos.2 and 3, Police

Inspector, Puna Police Station, Surat and

Administrator/Manager, Childrens'' Observation Home,

Ramnagar, Surat, to produce the corpus of Laxmi before

the Court. It is further prayed that the Court may

ascertain Laxmi''s wishes, order her release from the

alleged illegal custody of respondent No.3, and hand

over her custody to the petitioners.

The background facts, as stated in the petition

are to the effect that, the petitioners have two sons

but yearned for a daughter. Respondents Nos.4 and 5

herein, Laxmi''s biological parents, lived in the same

locality and were on good terms with the petitioners.

Respondents Nos.4 and 5 were not in a position to take

care of Laxmi. The petitioners offered to adopt her

and respondents Nos.4 and 5 agreed to give their

daughter in adoption to the petitioners. An Adoption

Deed was prepared on 18.08.2008, which was signed by

the petitioners and respondents Nos.4 and 5 and got

notarized. The Adoption Deed is produced on record as

Annexure-A. Laxmi was adopted by the petitioners when

she was about fourteen months old. Since then, it is

averred, the petitioners have brought her up with

utmost love and affection. They got Laxmi admitted to

a school and were providing her with a standard of

education as per their capacity. According to the

petitioners, they have been fulfilling all their

responsibilities as parents by giving Laxmi a proper

upbringing. Laxmi''s Report Card for Standard-III is

annexed as Annexure-B to the petition.

It is stated that suddenly, in the afternoon of

27.06.2017, respondents Nos.4 and 5, along with an

unknown girl, came to the house of thepetitioner s and

demanded that Laxmi be handed over to them. The

petitioners refused, explaining that they had adopted

the child legally by executing an Adoption Deed by

mutual consent. However, r espondents Nos.4 and 5 got

infuriated and started abusing petitioner No.2 (adoptive

mother), threatening her of dire consequences such as

implication in a false case. Laxmi was taken from the

house of the petitioners and lodged in the Childrens''

Home for Girls. Aggrieved thereby, thepetitioner s have

approached this Court.

Certain relevant facts have not been narrated in

the petition, but emerge from the papers of the

investigation. They would be necessary to complete the

narration and fill in the gaps. A Child Helpline, run

by an NGO named Pratham, under the aegis of the

Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of

India, received a telephone call on 28.06.2017, from

one Shri Pratik Sharma, Advocate, on behalf of

respondents Nos.4 and 5, Laxmi''s natural parents. The

Child Helpline was informed that Laxmi was allegedly

being ill-treated by her adoptive parents. On the

basis of this telephone call, Laxmi was taken from the

house of the petitioners with the aid of the Police

and produced before the Child Welfare Committee,

Surat. The Child Welfare Committee made an order of

Short Term Stay under Section-33(1) of the Juvenile

Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000

("the J.J. Act", for short), sending Laxmi to the

Childrens'' Home for Girls. This order was passed

pending the report of the inquiry required to be held

in the prescribed manner under Section-32 of the

J.J.Act, with regard to a child in need of care and

protection.

As per Section-32(2) of the J.J.Act, the inquiry

under Section-33(1) is required to be completed within

a period of four months of the receipt of the order,

or within such shorter period as may be fixed by the

Committee. It appears that the corpus was produced

before the Committee on 29.06.2017, when the period of

four months had not elapsed.

Rule was issued in the petition on 30.08.2017,

making it returnable on 06.09.2017. Thereafter, the

petition was listed from time to time. Laxmi was

produced before the Court and we had occasion to speak

to her at length.

Taking into consideration the aspect that Laxmi''s

welfare is paramount consideration as compared to the

conflicting claims of the adoptive and natural parents

this Court, vide order dated 11.09.2017, directed the

Child Welfare Committee, Surat, to hold a thorough

inquiry on all aspects of the matter, including the

reason why Laxmi''s custody was taken from the

petitioners at the behest of respondents Nos.4 and 5.

The inquiry was directed to be completed by

04.10.2017. Till then, it was directed that Laxmi

would continue to reside at the Childrens'' Home for

Girls. The petition was posted for hearing on

05.10.2017.

The Chairman of the Child Welfare Committee

submitted the report in a sealed cover as directed,

vide a forwarding letter dated 29.09.2017. The sealed

cover was opened and the report perused by the Court

on 05.10.2017 and resealed. The Registry was directed

to ensure that the sealed cover remained on the record

of the petition.

Looking to the nature of the case where two sets

of parents are demanding Laxmi''s custody and as the

welfare and future of the child is at stake, this

Court found that more intensive inputs would be

required before a final decision could be arrived at.

This Court interacted with the parties

extensively. Respondents Nos.4 and 5 stated certain

things regarding the petitioners which were required

to be verified from independent sources. The Court,

therefore, requested the Principal District Judge,

Surat, to make an inquiry into the background and

antecedents of the petitioners and respondents Nos.4

and 5 on all aspects including whether any of them

have a criminal background. The report was directed to

be submitted within two months from the date of the

order dated 05.10.2017. Till report was received,

Laxmi was to continue to reside at the Childrens'' Home

for Girls.

Ms.Gita Gopi, Principal District Judge, Surat,

submitted the report vide letter dated 04.12.2017,

which was put up before this Court on 06.12.2017. The

report is an extremely extensive and comprehensive

one, covering all relevant aspects minutely.

This Court has heard Mr.Nasir Saiyed, learned

advocate for the petitioners, Mr.Hardik Soni, learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for respondents Nos.1 to

3 and Mr.Prakash G. Pandya, learned advocate for

respondents Nos.4 and 5.

Before adverting to the report submitted by the

Principal District Judge, Surat, we may reopen the

sealed cover to take note of the earlier report

submitted by the Chairman, Child Welfare Committee,

Surat, vide forwarding letter dated 29.09.2017. The

crux of the said report is as follows :

(i) The adoption of Laxmi by the petitioner s is

not as per the guidelines of the Central

Adoption Resource Agency (CARA). The adoption

has not been done in accordance with law.

(ii) The parties have executed a Deed of Adoption

by mutual consent.

(iii) The Child Welfare Committee, Surat, has

detected a discrepancy in Laxmi''s age, as

reflected in the Adoption Deed, Birth

Certificate and the Aadhar Card.

(iv) On 29.06.2017, Laxmi''s adoptive parents and

biological parents were directed to remain

present before the Child Welfare Committee.

On that date there was an aggressive verbal

duel between them for Laxmi''s custody.

(v) As the petitioners and respondents Nos.4 and 5

stay in adjoining areas they frequently

indulge in quarrelling amongst themselves for

Laxmi''s custody. Both sides have submitted

applications to the Police Station in this

regard.

On the basis of the above observations the

Chairman, Child Welfare Committee, Surat, has opined

that if Laxmi''s custody is handed over to the

petitioners, her safety would be endangered. It is

stated that the subject-matter of the Adoption Deed is

a legal issue to be decided by the Court. Till such

time as the Court passes an appropriate order, it

would be in Laxmi''s interest to remain at the

Childrens'' Home for Girls.

The Court has interacted closely with Laxmi on

two or three occasions. She is an exceptionally bright

and talented child. The Superintendent of the

Childrens'' Home for Girls is all praise for her sweet

and loving nature and informed the Court that Laxmi is

very obedient, disciplined and helpful. Laxmi has a

talent for drawing and painting. On a previous

occasion when she visited the Court, she showed us

pictures she had drawn and coloured, which are

exceptionally good. Given the right opportunities,

Laxmi can fulfil the latent potential within her, if

provided with the right atmosphere and guidance. On

each occasion the Court inquired from Laxmi regarding

whom she would like to stay with. She has stated that

she would like to reside with the petitioners, her

adoptive parents. Laxmi was only fourteen when she was

given to the petitioners. She has known no other

parents and does not see respondents Nos.4 and 5 in

that light. Her desire to live with the petitioners is

quite natural under the circumstances. The issue to be

decided is not as simple as Laxmi''s innocent and

natural desire as the Court would have to look at all

aspects to ensure her welfare and safety in all

respects. It would have to be seen whether her desire

to live with the petitioners would be conducive to her

own welfare.

When she was living with the petitioners, Laxmi

was studying in Standard-III. After she was sent to

the Childrens'' Home for Girls, her studies were

interrupted. On one of the dates of hearing, the Court

was informed that Laxmi would now be admitted to a

school from the next academic session.

We may now revert to the report submitted by the

Principal District Judge, Surat. The report is a

detailed one. The Principal District Judge has sought

reports from (1) Principal Magistrate of Juvenile

Justice Board, (2) District Child Protection Unit, (3)

Police Inspector of Puna Police Station and (4)

Superintendent of Childrens'' Home for Girls, Ramnagar,

Surat. These individual reports have been placed on

record separately and have also been extensively

discussed in the report submitted by her.

The Principal District Judge has noted the

opinions of different authorities in the report. The

relevant extracts are reproduced hereinbelow :

"Opinion of the District Child Protection Unit, Surat:

The biological parents are ready to keep the child with them, but, during their visit of the child, she expressed her unwillingness to join her biological parents. The child is ready to stay with her adoptive parents. The residential area according to DCPU is not proper, atmosphere is not proper for child and on inquiry, they found that other members of the family are involved in criminal activities and therefore, DCPU found that it is not proper to give the child to the adoptive parents. But, the social welfare officer and the counselor of DCPU, Surat, expressed their opinion that, taking into consideration the future of the child, it would be proper to continue her studies by keeping her in the institution. (emphasis supplied)

Observation of the Police Inspector, Puna Police Station, Surat:

Thereafter, the P.I. Took the statement of Champaben Dharmendrasinh Rajput (P-2, adoptive mother) in the Rajivnagar slums, Umarwada, Sahara Darwaza, Surat city, and according to her, they have their own property and the bank balance of Rs.29,000/-. In their native, they have three houses and one temple and in all, there are 8 family members. The offence under NDPS and under the Prohibition Act for sale of Foreign Liquor

has been registered against her husband and a loot and assault case is filed against her son Kishan. She generates income of Rs.25,000/- by selling snacks on handcraft. The P.I. has stated that both the parties have good relations with their neighbours.

(emphasis supplied)

Observation of the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Surat :

On asking about Laxmi, the learned Principal Magistrate was informed that when she was small, she used to stay with the petitioners and that she has not been given in adoption and as they were neighbours, Laxmi used to go at their house to play and after being two years old, she has been staying with them and they used to go to see her. She also informed that learned Principal Magistrate that the injury on the forehead of Laxmi is because of knife blow and when she asked her daughter about it, she informed that, the petitioners were beating her. The biological mother of Laxmi also informed the learned Principal Magistrate that the petitioner Dharmendrasinh has ill intention for Laxmi and that she had been physically abused by some boy in the locality and when she inquired about the boy, the petitioner lady informed that the girl is going to some boy''s house and doing all the work of house and about the boy, she was informed that he had gone to village. The

biological mother stated that the petitioners are not taking care of her daughter, she is not safe in their house.

The Principal Magistrate had also inquired why they had not asked for the custody of the child for such a long time, for that, she could not reply. The Principal Magistrate on 24.11.2017 saw Laxmi at Children Home for Girls. She expressed her desire to stay with the petitioners only and she does not intend to go along with her biological parents. On asking about the reason, for that, the learned Principal Magistrate observed that the child had not replied. For the inquiry on the forehead, the child said that she had fallen down from her bed and therefore, she got injured. The child had not given any other information to the learned Principal Magistrate. (emphasis supplied)

Opinion of the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Surat :

The learned Principal Magistrate expressed her opinion that as biological parents want to keep the child, then it would in the interest of the child that the custody of child be given to the natural parents.

(emphasis supplied)

Observation of Superintendent, Children Home for

Girls, Ramnagar, Surat :

Laxmi is abandoned daughter of the natural parents and adopted by the petitioners. As per the statement of the biological mother, they have prayed for the custody of the child. According to them (respondents Nos.4 and 5), Dharmendrasinh Rajput''s family is not taking proper care of their daughter and they are beating her and are using her for transferring Ganja. There has been rape by the boy from neighbourhood. On counseling by Protection Officer and the Counselor, it was found that she was physically abused and that they had not received any information regarding the abuser. The adoptive mother Champaben has the knowledge regarding the abuser, the neighbour Manishaben had seen the abuser and on search, the said person could not be found and was not seen thereafter.

The Superintendent has noted that there is offence registered against Dharmendrasinh Rajput (P-1, adoptive father) under NDPS and Prohibition Act for selling foreign liquor and assault and loot case has been filed against Kiran Dharmendrasinh Rajput.

The Superintendent has observed that Dharmendrasinh Rajput (P-1, adoptive father) is in the business of Ganja. All the members of the family are addicted to pan and gutkha. Noting

the history of the family, she has stated that according to the statements of the neighbours, Dharmendrasinh''s business of Ganja is going on since one year and he has been doing the business under the guise of pujari in the temple. The girl was abandoned while she was 14 months old by the natural parents and was adopted by them. (emphasis supplied)

Opinion of the Superintendent, Children Home for Girls, Ramnagar, Surat :

The Superintendent, Children Home for Girls, has given her opinion stating, that comparing the economical, social and criminal history of the petitioners and the biological parents and when the girl is to be given to one of the family, then according to her, the child should be given to the biological parents."

(emphasis supplied)

After considering the reports of the above

authorities and making an independent inquiry by

visiting the houses of the petitioners and respondents

Nos.4 and 5 and after inquiring into the antecedents

and background of the parties, the Principal District

Judge, Surat, is of the following opinion :

"The reports of the (1)Principal Magistrate of Juvenile Justice Board, (2) District Child

Protection Unit, (3) Police Inspector of Puna Police Station and (4) Superintendent of Children Home for Girls, Ramnagar, are almost consistent, all have opined that the petitioners cannot be given the custody of child Laxmi.

The undersigned also feels that the child cannot have better future in the slum area, where the petitioners are in the business of selling Ganja and child Laxmi is also used in the business. While talking with Laxmi, it was found that selling Ganja is normal for her. The mother- petitioner is going out on the stall to sell snacks, there is no one to see, where the child is moving in the locality. The boys in the slum themselves are not getting healthy and respectful atmosphere, the child would be subject to physical abuse, and sexual harassment and assault. While the respondent No.4 and 5 have not sent their elder daughter to school, but, has got her married, the elder daughter is sending her children, which includes a girl child to school. The respondent Nos. 4 and 5''s youngest son is eight years old, their two sons are having education in Marathi school. Child Laxmi was in standard four in Nagar Prathmik Sikshan Samiti school. School No.69, Prafulchandra Chaki school, near Bombay Market, Khadi Mohalla, Umarwada, the school is a Gujarati medium school. The younger children of Shakuntalaben are in Marathi medium school. Kailash and Shakuntalaben Birade may get

child Laxmi admitted in Marathi medium, as they may have obsession for Marathi language, which may uproot the primary and basic education, which child Laxmi has taken, but at the same time, they may think to admit her in Nagar Prathmik School of their area, as the education is free of cost, so her schooling will not be effected.

In the Children Home for Girls at Ramnagar, Laxmi was in a merry mood. She said she has made many friends there. The Superintendent by her report dated 30.11.2017 informed that, she had often asked for Leaving certificate of Laxmi from Champaben Rajput, as has not given much importance to it, the Superintendent herself applied for the Leaving certificate from School No.69, to get her admitted to Bhagini Nivedita Primary School No.168, near the Children Home for Girls.

As per the report of the Superintendent, there are 52 girls in the Home. Till Standard 8, they study in Bhagini Nivedita Primary School No.168 and for standard 9 and 10, they go to Lokmaniya Vidhyalaya, Motifali, Morabhagal, Surat.

At present, the undersigned is of a humble opinion that child Laxmi needs an atmosphere, where all the girls are going for studies, a disciplined routine. She cannot be given to petitioners, where she will grow in a house,

visited by drug addict. She has been subject to sexual harassment and without care and guidance in the slums, she may fall in the hands of abusers. Child Laxmi is in need of care and protection.

Equally, the respondent No.4 and 5 cannot be given the custody, as they may not give academic career to the child. That house has neglected Laxmi. So she will not feel secured.

Till eighteen, Laxmi can grow in Children Home for Girls. Where, education is must. Then she may decide whom she should consider as her family."

(emphasis supplied)

In the report, the financial capacities of both

sets of parents have been indicated. It clearly

emerges from the report that neither the petitioners,

nor respondents Nos.4 and 5, can provide a suitable,

safe and secure atmosphere for Laxmi, in which she can

grow up and be nurtured in a healthy and protective

atmosphere. Laxmi appears to have become a pawn

between the two sets of warring parents, each one

claiming her custody but neither being in a position

to provide her a loving and secure atmosphere to live

in. There are reports of the criminal antecedents of

the petitioners and the physical abuse of Laxmi at

their house. Laxmi''s natural parents had thought it

fit to hand over their own daughter to the petitioners

as though she is some kind of commodity, ostensibly

because they were not able to look after her

financially and the petitioners wanted a daughter. One

wonders what other considerations may have passed.

It is not only the source of income or standard

of living that is of prime importance in matters such

as this one where the supreme consideration would be

the overall welfare of the child. The petitioners are

earning their living by selling Bread Pakodas, Samosas

and Bhajiyas. Their daily income is stated to be

Rs.3,000/- to Rs.4,000/-. They also get a monthly

income of Rs.2,000/- to Rs.3,000/- from their tea-

stall. Petitioner No.1 is stated to be a Pujari at a

temple. Their standard of living is stated to be

medium and as per the inputs from the neighbours, they

can provide for the primary requirements of the girl.

Insofar as respondents Nos.4 and 5 are concerned, it

is stated that when they gave their daughter for

adoption as they were not financially sound but now

their financial condition has improved. They found out

that the petitioners were ill-treating their daughter

and the petitioners are engaged in selling "Ganja".

They nurse an apprehension that Laxmi may be inducted

into this illegal business. There is also the danger

of Laxmi being exposed to sexual abuse, so they took

the step of informing the Child Helpline, leading to

Laxmi''s removal from the house of the petitioners and

her placement in the Childrens'' Home for Girls.

Mr.Nasir Saiyed, learned advocate for the

petitioners has submitted that Laxmi has been with the

petitioners since she was fourteen months old. The

Deed of Adoption has been notarized. No complaint has

been filed by any person, least of all respondents

Nos.4 and 5, regarding the alleged ill-treatment

meted out to Laxmi. She was being taken good care of

by the petitioners and was studying in a school. One

fine day, Laxmi''s biological parents came with the

Police and placed her in the Childrens'' Home for

Girls, for no reason. The petitioners have taken good

care of Laxmi for the past ten years. She has suddenly

been separated from them by respondents Nos.4 and 5,

who had given her willingly to them. Her custody

should, therefore, be restored to the petitioners,

which is what the child desires.

On the other hand, Mr.Prakash G. Pandya, learned

advocate for respondents Nos.4 and 5, has submitted

that the said respondents are Laxmi''s biological

parents and feel for her safety and welfare. They had

given Laxmi in adoption to the petitioners who had no

daughter. At that point of time, their financial

condition was not good. However, when they came to

know that Laxmi is being ill-treated and there was

danger to her physical safety, they approached the

Child Helpline and she was placed in the Childrens''

Home for Girls.

Mr.Pandya has fairly stated that though

respondents Nos.4 and 5 would like to have the custody

of their daughter, however, this Court may pass an

appropriate order taking into consideration the

paramount interest and welfare of the child.

Mr.Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioners have

criminal antecedents, which aspect has surfaced from

the papers of the investigation. To hand over the

custody of the child to the petitioners, therefore,

may not be in her best interest.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has further

submitted that the Deed of Adoption is not a legally

valid one. It is in the nature of an agreement that

has been notarized and has no value in the eyes of

law. He has further submitted that the corpus has not

stayed with her biological parents at all and does not

desire to stay with them. If the Court considers

handing over her custody to her biological parents,

the present petition may be kept pending. Ultimately,

the Court would take into consideration the welfare of

the child.

This Court has accorded deep and thoughtful

consideration to the facts and circumstances of the

case, the reports submitted by various authorities

including the report of the Principal District Judge,

Surat.

Considering that Laxmi was given to the

petitioners when she was fourteen months old, it is

not unnatural that she would desire to live with them.

She has known the petitioners as her parents and does

not see respondents Nos.4 and 5 in that capacity. She

has had no immediate contact with her natural parents

who chose not to look after her but handed over her to

the petitioners, purportedly in adoption, by executing

an Adoption Deed the legality of which would most

probably not stand the scrutiny of law.

Respondents Nos.4 and 5 have four children. They

could look after the other children but chose to give

Laxmi away. They have suddenly developed feelings of

affection and concern for their daughter whom they had

handed over to the petitioners as though she was a

commodity to be abandoned and claimed, to suit the

expediency of the moment. Now Laxmi does not want to

live with her natural parents and one cannot blame her

for this.

It has emerged from the report of the learned

Principal District Judge, Surat, that there are

offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985 ("the NDPS Act", for short) and

the Gujarat Prohibition Act, 1949, for the Sale of

Foreign Liquor against petitioner No.1, the adoptive

father of Laxmi. Loot and assault cases have been

filed against his son, Kishan. It has also emerged

that petitioner No.1 is stated to be selling "Ganja".

On 30.11.2017, the Principal District Judge, Surat,

visited Laxmi in the Childrens'' Home for Girls. She

made inquiries from her and found as below :

"When inquired about the business of Ganja of her father, she said that her father is selling Ganja at Rs.20/- and that she was also selling small packets at Rs.20/-. She also stated that her father was consuming Ganja and when her mother would remain at home, she would sell Ganja.

On inquiring about the physical abuse, the child said that a boy had taken her 10 rupees and had told her that he would give if she comes to his house. The child told the undersigned that at that time, the said boy had touched at her waist and when inquired about the boy removing her underwear (nicker) she stated that when she had gone to a shop, a boy had removed her chaddi and a neighbouring aunty had seen him and she started shouting and so, her brother had come there and had beaten the boy, who thereafter, ran away from the place. When inquired about her injury at the eyes, she said that she had fallen down from the bed and on asking about the injury on hand, she said that she had gone to throw waste and at that time, while playing with boys, as she got late,

her mummy had beaten her as she was playing with boys."

From the above it is clear that petitioner No.1

has criminal antecedents and Laxmi was unknowingly

being used as a carrier and made to sell packets of

"Ganja" at Rs.20/-. Laxmi has informed the Principal

District Judge that her father used to consume

"Ganja". There is more than a hint of physical abuse

and a distinct possibility that Laxmi may be open to

physical assault if she is put into the custody of the

petitioners. She has herself narrated the incident

reproduced above regarding this aspect.

Laxmi is now ten years old and is a growing

girl. Soon she would attain the age of puberty. She

requires a safe, secure and protective atmosphere to

live in, where her talents would unfold and her

physical safety would be ensured. After perusing the

material on record, this Court is of the considered

view that Laxmi would not be safe in an environment

where "Ganja" is purportedly used and sold and where

she may be a target for physical molestation.

This Court is of the firm view that the

paramount welfare of the child dictates that her

custody may not be given to either the petitioners

(adoptive parents) or respondents Nos.4 and 5

(biological parents).

At present, Laxmi has made several friends in

the Childrens'' Home for Girls. She is a bright and

talented child who has great potential that is

required to be tapped, nurtured and guided, so that

she can find her own place in the world. The

Superintendent of the Childrens'' Home for Girls has

already applied for the School Leaving Certificate

from School No.69, where she used to study, so that

she can be admitted to the Bhagini Nivedita Primary

School No.168, near the Childrens'' Home for Girls. At

present, there are fifty-two girls in the Home. Till

Standard-VIII they are made to study in Bhagini

Nivedita Primary School No.168. For Standards-IX and

X, they go to Lokmaniya Vidhyalaya, Motifali,

Morabhagal, Surat. If Laxmi continues to stay at the

Childrens'' Home for Girls, she would be in the company

of other girls who are also pursuing their studies.

She would live a sheltered and disciplined life, under

proper care, protection and guidance. Laxmi is too

young to understand her own ultimate welfare. For her,

the home of her adoptive parents is her home. Had the

atmosphere in the petitioners house been conducive,

her desire could have been considered. However, the

material on record is quite shocking and deters us

from doing so. Laxmi''s desire will have to be

subservient to her own welfare.

Taking into consideration Laxmi''s safety and

welfare, we direct that she shall reside at the

Childrens'' Home for Girls, Surat, till she attains the

age of eighteen years. There, she will be provided

with proper education, care, protection and medical

facilities, as required. When Laxmi attains the age of

eighteen years she will be free to decide whether she

wants to reside with her biological parents

(respondents Nos.4 and 5) or her adoptive parents

(petitioners), or whether she wants to chart her own

course in life.

The Superintendent of the Childrens'' Home for

Girls shall ensure that apart from her studies, Laxmi

is given vocational training in any sphere that she

shows an interest in, so that her latent talents can

blossom. In case of any requirement, the

Superintendent of the Childrens'' Home for Girls,

Surat, is at liberty to approach this Court through

the office of the learned Public Prosecutor.

The report of the Chairman, Child Welfare

Committee, Surat and that of the Principal District

Judge, Surat, shall remain in the safe custody of the

Registry of this Court.

Subject to the above directions, the petition

stands disposed of. Rule is discharged.