Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (Supreme Court, Feb 2014)

Core holding: The Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 gives a secular, nationwide route to adopt, open to all citizens irrespective of religion. The Court, however, did not declare a fundamental right to adopt. It said such elevation must wait for broader social agreement and legislative readiness.

1. For non-Hindu adoptions, should Muslim personal law apply or the common secular route under the JJ Act, 2000?
2. Is the right to adopt (and be adopted) a fundamental right for all, regardless of religion?

• JJ Act, 2000 (as amended): Enables adoption through a secular statutory process.
• Article 44: Directive Principle on a Uniform Civil Code—context, not direct mandate.
• Muslim personal law: Recognizes guardianship (kafala), not adoption equal to biological filiation.

• Shabnam Hashmi tried to adopt; told “no Muslim children.” She wished to adopt a daughter.
• In practice, Muslims used the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, which gives guardianship, not full adoptive status or inheritance rights.
• Hashmi filed a writ (2005) seeking equal adoption status and recognition as a fundamental right under Article 21.
• All India Muslim Personal Law Board objected, citing personal law and the kafala model.
• Petitioner argued JJ Act (amended 2006) permits adoption across religions and protects a child’s right to family identity.
• Case reached final decision in Feb 2014.

Held: Fundamental rights are dynamic, but recognizing a fundamental right to adopt or be adopted must wait for broader consensus. The legislature’s secular route—the JJ Act—already enables adoption by any person regardless of faith, and should be respected and used. Therefore, citizens may adopt under the JJ Act, but adoption is not yet a fundamental right under Article 21.

• Secular pathway: JJ Act provides an all-religions adoption mechanism.
• No FR status (yet): Adoption is not elevated to Article 21 at present.
• Respect for pluralism: Personal law concerns noted; reform via legislature and society.

The ruling confirms a clear, secular route for adoption across religions, while balancing faith practices. It guides courts, agencies, and families on using the JJ Act for full legal adoption.

• JJ Act adoption is religion-neutral.
• Adoption ≠ Fundamental Right (for now).
• Guardianship (kafala) differs from adoption.
• Reform path is legislative and societal.

Mnemonic: “JJ: Join Journeys”

1. JJ → JJ Act opens adoption to all.
2. Join → brings child and parent into full legal family.
3. Journeys → Fundamental right status is a future journey, not today.

Issue

Whether adoption by Muslims follows personal law or the JJ Act; and whether adoption is a fundamental right.

Rule

JJ Act, 2000 (secular adoption framework); Article 44 (context of uniform laws); personal law on guardianship (kafala).

Application

JJ Act provides a complete process for any person to adopt. Personal law concerns were acknowledged but not allowed to block the statutory route.

Conclusion

Adoption is available to all under the JJ Act; it is not yet a fundamental right under Article 21.

JJ Act

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000—statute enabling secular adoption.

Kafala

A guardianship model in Islamic law; not equivalent to legal adoption with full filiation.

Article 44

Directive Principle encouraging a Uniform Civil Code; not directly enforceable.

• Decisions applying the JJ Act for inter-faith adoptions.
• Cases distinguishing guardianship under GWA, 1890 from full adoption.
• Judgments discussing Article 21 and evolving family rights.