Can a Notarised Adoption Deed Make You Legal Parents? What Two High Courts Said in 2026
Adoption in India is not simply a private arrangement between a child's biological and prospective adoptive parents. It is a legal process governed by specific statutory requirements.
Two High Court decisions in 2026, one from the Calcutta High Court and another from the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench), highlight an important distinction:
A child may be living with and cared for by a family for years, but a notarised adoption deed by itself does not automatically establish legal adoption.
At the same time, the Courts made another important point: failure to follow the prescribed adoption procedure does not automatically give a Child Welfare Committee (CWC) jurisdiction to take custody of a child who does not fall within the statutory category of a "Child in Need of Care and Protection."
These two principles are central to understanding the decisions.
The Calcutta High Court Case: A Three-Year-Old Returned to the Couple Who Raised Him
What happened?
In Smt. Aparna Das & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal & Ors., the Calcutta High Court considered the custody of a child born prematurely on February 24, 2023, at M.R. Bangur Hospital, Kolkata.
The child was born at approximately 29 weeks and weighed around 1.68 kg. He remained in the Special Newborn Care Unit for about 25 days.
According to the Court, after the child's discharge, his biological parents handed him over to the petitioners, who thereafter cared for him.
The parties had also executed a notarised adoption deed, but the statutory adoption procedure was not followed.
The issue arose when the couple approached the authorities in connection with obtaining a birth certificate reflecting their names. The Child Welfare Committee subsequently took custody of the child.
The couple approached the Calcutta High Court.
What Did the Calcutta High Court Decide?
Justice Krishna Rao delivered the judgment on September 17, 2026. The Court made two important findings.
First: The notarised deed did not by itself establish legal adoption
The Court made it clear that merely executing a notarised adoption deed did not give the petitioners an independent legal right to claim custody as adoptive parents.
The Court noted that the biological parents had given the child to the petitioners without following the proper legal procedure.
Therefore, the couple could not simply rely upon the notarised document as proof that they had acquired the full legal status of adoptive parents.
Second: The CWC also could not automatically take custody
This, however, did not mean that the CWC was entitled to take custody of the child.
The Court examined the definition of a "Child in Need of Care and Protection" under Section 2(14) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
It found that the child was neither orphan nor abandoned and did not otherwise fall within the statutory circumstances that would bring him within the CWC's jurisdiction.
The Court therefore held that the CWC's decision to take custody was not justified. The Court directed the child to be returned to the couple who had been caring for him.
However, the Court also directed them to approach the appropriate legal forum to establish their status as adoptive parents.
The Court additionally directed welfare monitoring of the child through the District Legal Services Committee.
The Bombay High Court Case: A Similar Question in Chandrapur
A similar issue arose before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, in Nilima Dilip Kannurwar v. Child Welfare Committee.
The biological parents had voluntarily given their third child to another couple. According to the petitioners, an adoption ceremony was performed at a temple in April 2026, followed by execution of a notarised adoption deed.
The Child Welfare Committee subsequently took custody of the child and returned the child to the biological parents.
The petitioners challenged the CWC's decision.
The CWC order being challenged was dated May 25, 2026; the Bombay High Court subsequently decided the matter on July 31, 2026.
What Did the Bombay High Court Hold?
The Bombay High Court also drew a clear distinction between valid adoption and CWC jurisdiction.
The Court accepted that the prescribed adoption procedure had not been followed and that merely notarising the adoption deed did not, by itself, make the adoption legally valid.
However, the Court also found that the child did not fall within the statutory category of a child in need of care and protection.
Consequently, the CWC could not assume jurisdiction merely because the parties had failed to follow the proper adoption procedure.
The High Court therefore quashed the CWC's order and directed that custody be restored to the petitioners.
The Key Legal Distinction
These two cases are important because they demonstrate that two separate legal questions should not be confused.
Question 1: Is the adoption legally valid?
A notarised deed, by itself, does not necessarily establish a legally valid adoption.
The applicable adoption law and procedure must be followed.
Question 2: Does the CWC have jurisdiction to take custody?
That is a different question.
The CWC's powers under the Juvenile Justice Act are linked to children who fall within the statutory definition of "Children in Need of Care and Protection."
Therefore, an irregular adoption does not automatically mean that the CWC can take custody of any child involved in that arrangement.
This distinction is perhaps the most important takeaway from the two judgments.
Does a Notarised Adoption Deed Make You Legal Parents?
Not by itself.
A notarised document can be evidence of an arrangement or of the parties' stated intentions, but notarisation does not itself create all the legal consequences of a valid adoption.
The legal validity of an adoption depends upon the applicable adoption law and compliance with its requirements.
For example, adoptions may be governed by different legal frameworks, including:
the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA), where applicable; and
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, together with the applicable adoption regulations, for adoptions undertaken through that statutory framework.
The Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) and the CARINGS system are particularly relevant to adoptions under the JJ Act framework.
Therefore, it would be incorrect to assume that simply signing and notarising a document between two families completes the legal adoption process.
Why Did the Courts Return the Children?
It is important not to misunderstand these judgments as validating private or informal adoptions.
The Courts did not say that a notarised adoption deed is a legally sufficient substitute for the statutory adoption process.
Instead, they examined a separate issue: whether the CWC had lawful authority to remove children who did not fall within the statutory category of children requiring CWC intervention.
In both cases, the Courts considered the circumstances of the children and the statutory limits on CWC jurisdiction.
The decisions therefore protect two principles at the same time:
The adoption law must be followed.
Child-protection authorities must also act within the jurisdiction given to them by law.
Why These 2026 Judgments Matter
The two decisions provide an important lesson for prospective adoptive parents:
Informal custody and legal parentage are not the same thing.
A family may genuinely love and care for a child and may have received the child with the biological parents' consent. That, however, does not by itself eliminate the statutory requirements governing adoption.
At the same time, authorities cannot assume unlimited powers merely because an adoption procedure was not followed.
The best interests and welfare of the child, together with the statutory limits on the powers of child-protection authorities, remain important considerations. The Calcutta High Court, for example, ordered continued welfare monitoring even after directing restoration of custody.
The Takeaway
The 2026 decisions of the Calcutta and Bombay High Courts should not be read as saying that a notarised adoption deed is sufficient to become a legal parent.
Rather, they establish an important distinction:
An irregular adoption does not automatically become a valid adoption merely because a child has lived with a family for years or because an adoption deed has been notarised.
At the same time, the absence of a legally completed adoption does not automatically give the Child Welfare Committee jurisdiction to take custody of a child who does not fall within the statutory definition of a Child in Need of Care and Protection.
For families considering adoption, the safest approach is to follow the applicable statutory adoption procedure from the beginning. For families who have already entered into a private adoption arrangement, the appropriate legal route should be examined promptly rather than relying solely on a notarised document.
Love and care are fundamental to a child's upbringing. Legal parentage, however, requires compliance with the law.
Legal Disclaimer
This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Adoption laws and procedures may vary depending on the circumstances and applicable legal framework. Please consult a qualified family-law/adoption lawyer before taking any action.
The Author :
Dr. Sunil Khattri
+91 9811618704
Dr Sunil Khattri MBBS, MS(General Surgery), LLB, is a Medical doctor and is a practicing Advocate in the Supreme Court of India and National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi.
Comments