Who is Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma? What Delhi HC said about adoption by couple with two or more children

The Delhi High Court has ruled that prospective adoptive parents with two or more children cannot be considered as an adopted child classified as “normal” under the Adoption Ordinance, 2022. The ruling, delivered by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, clarifies the eligibility restrictions applicable to such couples and the circumstances under which they can be considered as adopted children with special needs or children classified as “difficult”. Statement reported.

The ruling came in a petition filed by an Indian-origin couple living in Singapore who challenged the withdrawal of an adoption application for a little girl identified as “Baby K”. The couple already had two biological sons at the time of the referral.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, sitting as a single judge, held that the recommendation issued by the Central Adoption Authority (CARA), though accepted by the prospective adoptive parent, was contrary to Regulation 5(7) of the 2022 Ordinance. Thus, it did not recognize an inalienable right or a legitimate expectation to adopt a child.

The court also held that the delay in issuing the No Objection Certificate (NOC) cannot be treated as approval. Directed CARA to strengthen eligibility checks, audit profiles affected by portal migration, process NOCs within prescribed deadlines and ensure accurate application statuses and response to complaints.

Read also | Why did Saurav Das, CJP’s Ranka withdraw Delhi HC plea against custody?

Who is Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma?

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma is a Judge of the Delhi High Court. In that case, she presided over a single-judge bench which examined whether a couple with two biological children could challenge the withdrawal of an adoption application under the Adoption Regulations 2022.

Her decision concerned the application of regulation 5(7), which limits the eligibility of prospective adopters with two or more children to adopt a child in the normal category, subject to specified exceptions.

The judgment also examined whether an adoption application already issued and accepted can create an enforceable expectation of adoption if the prospective parents do not meet the relevant eligibility criteria.

Read also | Who is Tana Opu Tara? New member of youth wing of BJP from Arunachal Pradesh

What did Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma say about adoption by a couple with two or more children?

The court held that the petitioner, who already had two biological children, was not eligible to adopt a child in the ordinary category under the 2022 order. Such prospective parents may be considered for children with special needs or children classified as difficult to place if adoption does not fall within the specified exemptions for relatives or stepchildren.

The claimant argued that Baby K was not a normal child or that her condition had not been conclusively established and that she could potentially fall into the difficult to classify category.

Justice Sharma rejected this contention, noting:

“…it is clear that, having regard to Regulation 5(7) of the 2022 Regulations, the Claimant could only be considered for adoption as a special needs or hard-to-place child. However, the Claimant also raised the objection that Baby K was not in fact a normal child, or at least that her condition was not immutable, and that she could also fall into the category of two hard-to-place children…eligible to be considered for the adoption of a normal category child under the Regulations of 2022 and that Child K could not, on the material on record, be treated either as a child with special needs or as a difficult-to-place child The referral of Child K to the appellant was therefore contrary to Regulation 5(7) of the 2022 Regulation.

Read also | Veteran Tamil singer Krishnaraj dies at 75, CM Vijay expresses shock

The court held that an assignment filed in violation of the regulations could not override the statutory eligibility requirements. Reliance was also placed on Debarati Nandee v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 1075 and Union of India v. Ankur Gupta, (2019) 18 SCC 276.

Why did the Delhi High Court reject the couple’s plea?

The couple applied for international adoption in December 2020, when they had one biological child. Their second child was born in March 2022.

Their home study report expired in December 2023 and was not revalidated until 2025. In January 2026, CARA referred an infant girl, Baby K, to the petitioner, who accepted the referral within hours.

CARA withdrew the recommendation on 30 March 2026 after the status of the application showed as “Application Rejected – Withdrawn”. The authority cited regulation 5(7), which states that couples with two or more children can only be considered as children with special needs or difficult to place.

The petitioner approached the Delhi High Court on 12 April 2026. On 13 April 2026, the court passed a status quo order and ordered a fresh medical examination of the child.

The court subsequently found that Baby K could not be classified as a child with special needs or as a child with placement difficulties in the material presented to him. The second category includes children for whom no eligible family applies after referral.

The bench also held that the NOC is not merely a procedural formality and that the court cannot direct the authority to act contrary to the applicable regulations. He further ruled that the principle of estoppel cannot operate against the law.

What did Justice Sharma say about the best interests of the child?

The court stated that the principle of the best interest of the child cannot be used to circumvent the legal guarantees governing adoption and the placement of children in future families.

The Bench observed:

“…the principle of the best interests of the child cannot be invoked to circumvent the very safeguards designed to ensure appropriate and lawful adoptive placements. Accordingly, this court is of the opinion that, regardless of the circumstances under which the referral was withdrawn by CARA and the emotions of the petitioner and his family, the best interests of Baby K do not require the relief of the child as requested in the appropriate motion as set forth in this prima facie motion. process that is consistent with the governing statutory framework, viz. under Regulation 2022”.

The court rejected the proposal and let the preliminary measure lapse.

What directions was given by the Delhi High Court to CARA?

In addition to its decision on adoption eligibility, the Court ordered CARA to deal with administrative issues in the adoption process.

The Authority was ordered to:

Before generating an adoption recommendation, verify the eligibility of potential adoptive parents.

Audit profiles affected by portal migration.
Process the NOC within the prescribed time limits.
Make sure application statuses on the portal are accurate and include reasons.
Fix responsibility for errors and ensure appropriate responses to complaints.
In accordance with the law, place child K for adoption immediately.

Why is judgment important?

The ruling clarifies that a referral for adoption does not create an automatic right to adopt a child if the prospective parents do not meet the eligibility criteria under the governing regulations.

For couples who already have two or more children, Regulation 5(7) limits the consideration of adopting a child to the mainstream category, taking into account children with special needs and hard-to-place children and specific exceptions.

The decision also highlights the importance of eligibility verification before making recommendations and the need for adoption authorities to process applications and NOCs within prescribed time limits.

The ruling does not impose a blanket ban on all further adoptions by parents with two or more children. Rather, it explains how the relevant capacity limitations work and why the best interests of the child must be considered within the governing legal framework.