Open vs Closed Adoption in India: What Does the Law Allow?

Millions of children in India wait for permanent homes. But prospective parents navigating the adoption system often encounter a question the law answers only in part: can birth families and adoptive families maintain contact, and does it have a name in Indian statute? 

When people talk about adoption, two phrases come up almost immediately: open adoption and closed adoption. In many Western jurisdictions, these are legally defined arrangements, sometimes even enforceable contracts, spelling out how much contact, if any, a birth parent may have with a child after the adoption is finalised. 

In India, the picture is more nuanced, and for anyone embarking on the adoption journey, understanding exactly what the law permits, and what it leaves to custom or silence, is essential.

The Legal Framework at a Glance

Adoption in India is governed by a small constellation of laws. The dominant statute for most adoptions today is the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act), amended in 2021, which is a secular law applicable to all religions. Its operational arm is the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA), a statutory body under the Ministry of Women and Child Development that maintains the national adoption portal and sets binding regulations through the Adoption Regulations, 2022.

Alongside this sits the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA), which still applies to Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs adopting within their community, typically in intra-family arrangements. 

For Muslims, Christians, Parsis, and Jews, whose personal laws do not recognise adoption as such, the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 provides a route to legal guardianship, though the child does not acquire the full legal status of a biological child in the same way.

Defining Open and Closed Adoption

Open Adoption is one in which some degree of ongoing contact or information-sharing is maintained between the birth parents and the adoptive family after the adoption is finalised. This can range from a single annual update letter to regular in-person visits. The key feature is that the identity of one or both parties is known to the other, and there is an agreed channel, however limited, of communication.

Closed Adoption is one in which all identifying information about the birth parents is sealed from the adoptive family, and vice versa. The child grows up with no formal link to their biological origins; records may be inaccessible even when the child reaches adulthood. For decades, closed adoption was the global default, today many jurisdictions are reconsidering this, but India has not legislated comprehensively in the other direction either.

What Indian Law Actually Says

Here is the critical point that surprises many families: Indian law does not formally define or categorise adoptions as "open" or "closed." The JJ Act and CARA Regulations use neither term. What the law does do is establish several default rules and protections that effectively shape how much openness is possible.

The Default: Near-Closure Under CARA

For adoptions processed through CARA, which covers the vast majority of domestic adoptions of orphaned, abandoned, or surrendered children, the system is, in practice, closer to the closed model. 

Adoptive parents are not provided details of the child's caste, religio-communal background, or the identity of birth parents. A fresh birth certificate is issued after the adoption order, listing the adoptive parents as the legal parents. 

Birth Parent Anonymity: A Protected Right

When giving up a child, if the biological parents ask for anonymity, the Specialised Adoption Agency or the District Child Protection Unit must get their written consent before giving any information to anyone. This means birth parents who want their identities protected have a formal mechanism to ensure it.

When Adoptees Seek Their Origins

What happens when an adopted child, now an adult, wants to trace their biological roots? This is where Indian law has a significant gap. There is no statutory right, equivalent to those in the UK or Australia, for an adult adoptee to access their original birth records or the identity of their birth parents. 

Any such disclosure depends on whether the birth parent consented to it at the time of surrender, and on the goodwill of the SAA holding the records. In practice, this makes root-searching difficult and inconsistent.

Open Arrangements Under HAMA

HAMA primarily applies to intra-family and community-based adoptions, where a child is taken from a known relative, or from parents directly known to the adoptive family. Open arrangements therefore arise naturally. Both families often know each other, may share social circles, and may continue to interact. HAMA does not prohibit this; nor does it mandate any particular level of contact. The arrangement is left entirely to the parties and to custom.

The Step-Parent and Relative Adoption Exception

One adoption route that naturally creates an open arrangement is step-parent and relative adoption. When a step-parent adopts a child, or when a child is adopted by a close relative, the family dynamics make complete information-sealing impractical and indeed unnecessary. 

The JJ Act and CARA Regulations have specific provisions for this, including surrender of the child before the Child Welfare Committee with the biological parent's consent. In such cases, the child often continues to have social contact with the biological family, even if the legal relationship has been restructured.

The Gap in Indian Law: What Needs Reform?

Several advocacy groups and legal scholars have noted that India's adoption framework, while significantly strengthened by the JJ Act and the 2022 Regulations, has not kept pace with evolving international thinking on adoptee rights and identity. Three areas in particular are often cited.

1. No Statutory Right to Origins. Adult adoptees in India have no guaranteed legal right to access information about their birth parents. Countries such as the UK, Australia, and several US states have enacted laws giving adoptees access to their original birth certificates. India has no equivalent provision, an inconsistency that advocates argue conflicts with the child's right to identity under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which India ratified in 1992.

2. No Enforceability for Open Arrangements. Even where birth parents and adoptive parents agree to some form of ongoing contact, Indian law provides no mechanism to make such an arrangement enforceable. If the adoptive family chooses to cut contact, the birth parent has no legal recourse. Any open arrangement rests entirely on good faith.

3. Ongoing Inclusivity Debates. The exclusion of same-sex couples and the restriction on single men adopting girls remain contested. While unrelated to open or closed adoption per se, these limitations affect who can form a family through adoption at all, and continue to be challenged in courts and by civil society.

Conclusion

The distinction between open and closed adoption occupies an ambiguous space in Indian legislation. The JJ Act and CARA Regulations do not use these terms, but their operational design tilts strongly toward closed arrangements, anonymity is protected, identity is not routinely disclosed, and birth certificates are reissued in the adoptive parents' names. Intra-family adoptions under HAMA offer a natural, if unregulated, form of openness.

What India's framework has not yet developed is the scaffolding that makes these arrangements meaningful in the long run: an adoptee's right to know their origins, an enforceable mechanism for agreed open arrangements, and clear guidance on what happens when the child grows up and wants answers. As adoption numbers grow and awareness of adoptee rights deepens, these are the legislative frontiers that advocates, courts, and policymakers will increasingly need to address.

For now, families navigating this path should approach the process with clear eyes about what the law guarantees, what it permits informally, and where the silences remain.

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Prospective adoptive parents are encouraged to consult a qualified family law practitioner and refer to the latest CARA guidelines at cara.wcd.gov.in.

---

The Author :

Dr. Sunil Khattri 

sunilkhattri@gmail.com

+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.