Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Union Of India vs Jan Balaz . on 17 March, 2016
Bench: Ranjan Gogoi, N.V. Ramana
ITEM NO.302 COURT NO.7 SECTION IX/PIL(W)/X
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8714/2010
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
JAN BALAZ & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
W.P.(C) NO. 95/2015
(WITH APPLN.(S) FOR IMPLEADMENT AND INTERVENTION AND PERMISSION TO
FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS AND STAY AND OFFICE REPORT)
W.P.(C) NO. 841/2015
(WITH APPLN.(S) FOR INTERIM STAY AND OFFICE REPORT)
Date : 17/03/2016 These cases were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
For parties(s)
Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR
Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Tamali Wad, AOR
Mr. Ashish Wad, Adv.
Mrs. Kanika Baweja, Adv.
Ms. Paromita Majumdar, Adv.
Ms. Jaya Khanna, Adv.
Mr. ATM Rangaramanujam, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pranab Kumar Mullick, AOR
Mr. M. Krishnan, Adv.
Mr. Sebat Kumar Deuria, Adv.
Mrs. Soma Mullick, Adv.
Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, AOR
Ms. Shumaila Altaf, Adv.
Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
VINOD LAKHINA
Date: 2016.03.18
16:55:31 IST
Ms. Puja Singh, Adv.
Reason:
Page No.1 of 4
Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv.
Mr. S.W.A. Qadri, Adv.
Ms. Hema Sahu, Adv.
Mr. S.S. Rawat, Adv.
Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi, Adv.
Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv.
Ms. Meenakshi Grover, Adv.
Ms. Gargi Khanna, Adv.
Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Zaid Ali, Adv.
Ms. Meha Sahu, Adv.
Mr. D. S. Mahra, AOR
Ms. Sushma Suri, AOR
Mr. Gaurav Sharma, AOR
Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv.
Mr. Dhawal Mohan, Adv.
Mr./Ms. Vara Gour, Adv.
Mr. Gagan Gupta, AOR
Mr. Rahul Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Shekhar Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Vishnu Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Anupama Sharma, Adv.
Mr. R.K. Thakur, Adv.
Mr. Gurpreet Singh, Adv.
Mr. Naman Nayak, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Writ Petition No.841 of 2015
The prayers made in the writ petition is sought to be opposed by the Union of India in its counter affidavit dated 29th January, 2016 by relying on paragraph 2(ii) of letter/circular dated 3rd November, 2015 which is to the following effect:
Page No.2 of 4
“(ii) No permission should be granted by the Foreigners Regional Registration Officers (FRROs)/Foreigners Registration Officers (FROs) to Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholders to commission surrogacy in India.” The aforesaid clause is in apparent disharmony with clause 60(11)(a) to (c) of the draft 'The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill, 2014' which is to the following effect:
“60(11)(a)Surrogacy for foreigners in India shall not be allowed but surrogacy shall be permissible to Overseas Citizen of India (OCIs), People of Indian Original (PIOs), Non Resident Indians (NRIs) and foreigner married to an Indian citizen.
(b) The commissioning couple including Overseas Citizen of India, People of Indian Origin, Non Resident Indians and foreigner married to an Indian citizen who have availed of the services of a surrogate shall be legally bound to accept the custody of the child or children irrespective of any abnormality that the child or children may have.
(c) If abnormalities are detected in the child/children during the gestation period, then the commissioning parent shall ensure that the defected/disabled child/children are appropriately insured and compensation to be used for the development and growth of the child/children by the next in the family, in case of accidental death of the commissioning parents during delivery or in the process of delivery of the surrogate child.” Page No.3 of 4 We would request the learned Solicitor General of India who appears in the case to assist the Court to resolve the issue insofar as the limited prayer (b) of the writ petition is concerned.
As this Bench is assembling on 13th April, 2016 for some other cases, Office is directed to list these cases on the said date i.e. 13th April, 2016 at the top of the list. On the said date the learned Solicitor General of India, on instructions received/to be received, will apprise the Court the present stage of the 'The Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Bill, 2014', namely, whether the consultation process is over and the said Bill is ready to be introduced in Parliament.
[VINOD LAKHINA] [ASHA SONI]
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
Page No.4 of 4