An Israeli couple, who claim to be related to the biological parents of a three-month-old child whom they want to adopt and take him back home, were not allowed to do so.
The Bombay high court has restrained the couple from taking away the child as the couple could not prove their relation through documents.
“If the petitioners (Israeli couple) make any fresh application for adoption on fresh circumstances and cause of action, they shall mention in the adoption petition the fact of this petition having filed and rejected,” said the court.
The court also directed the Indian passport/visa/emigration/immigration authority to take due care and action to see that no Indian child is allowed to go out of India with the couple, including the minor child in this case, until an order of adoption is passed by this court.
Dhokarkar David and Dhokarkar Seema David have no child of their own. Seema lived in Maharashtra before marrying David and is the first cousin of the child’s biological mother, Shubhadhra Sonawane.
As per their petition filed through their advocate RA Shaikh, the child’s parents are poor are unable to bring up their three children and so wanted to give away their youngest son to the wife’s cousin.
After verifying the documents, the court observed: “There is no documentary evidence to show that wives are first cousins.”
Both the couples filed their income proofs and the Israeli couple was willing to give an undertaking to the court that they would draw a will bequeathing their properties to the adopted child.
The court also took into account that David who is now settled in Israel was employed as a loader in Shakeeum at Ashdod Port, but after he met with an accident he is being paid an allowance by the National Insurance Institution.
As per records, he receives an annual compensation of 58,692 sheqel. The conversion rate to Indian currency is Rs13.84. He has produced his bank account statement in Ashdod branch of bank Hapotalim. The bank accounts show certain credits from time to time of around 5,000 sheqel. These appear to be the disability allowance granted to him.
The court said: “Mrs David is a housewife and has no income. It is seen that the biological parents are extremely poor. However, the adoptive parents are not in very good financial circumstances.”
Terming that the adoption is not genuine, the court added: “The court must be aware of the fact that poor children are trafficked into slave labour or prostitution.”
