Madras High Court
Palani Pandi vs Nil on 5 August, 2025
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.981 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.981 of 2025
1.Palani Pandi
2.Ramesh Kumar
3.S.Selvarani ... Petitioners
-vs-
Nil ... Respondent
PRAYER : Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 438 r/w. 442 of
BNSS, 2023, to set aside the order dated 08.07.2025, passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, in Crl.M.P.No.124 of 2025.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Senthilkumar
ORDER
Challenging the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam, in Cr.M.P.No.124 of 2025 dated 08.07.2025, this Criminal Revision Petition is filed.
2.The petitioners together filed a Petition under Sections 4(iii)(a)(11) and 4(iii)(a)(III) of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, seeking permission Page 1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/08/2025 05:24:42 pm ) Crl.R.C.(MD)No.981 of 2025 of the learned Trial Court with respect to the petitioners 1 and 2 as parents and to take care and custody of the child which would be born through surrogacy to the proposed surrogate mother who is the third petitioner herein. They also prayed to accept their sworn affidavit regarding the insurance coverage. They also produce all the documents as mandated under the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, before the learned Trial Court for the appreciation of their petition. However, the learned Trial Court while recording sworn statement of the third petitioner that is the surrogate mother that, she had failed to properly depose her date of her marriage infrained from allowing the petition raising question as to the bonafide of the third petitioner. More particularly, it has been observed by the learned Trial Court that in so far as the surrogacy is concerned, the surrogate mother's statement, willingness and background has to be satisfied by the learned Trial Court. Since her inadvertance in not remembering her date of marriage had created a cloud about her bonafide, the learned Trial Court proceeded to dismiss the said application. Challenging the same, this Criminal Revision Case is filed.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the reason on the basis of which the impugned order is passed is highly ridiculous and the same is not sustainable. The third petitioner being the surrogate mother is very new to the Court atmosphere. Though a proof affidavit was filed stating the exact date of marriage as 07.08.2008, while Page 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/08/2025 05:24:42 pm ) Crl.R.C.(MD)No.981 of 2025 disposing her sworn evidence she out of nervousness submitted that her marriage was held before 15 years, however, she do not know the date of her marriage and only on the sole ground the petition is dismissed. Pointing out that the petitioners together have completed all the necessary mandates of Surrogancy (Regulations) Act, 2021 more particularly, mandated under Chapter 3 under Regulations of Surrogacy and surrogacy procedures, the learned Trial Court ought not to have dismissed the same and pressed for allowing the Revision Case.
4.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the materials available on record.
5.I do not find any merit in the order passed by the learned Trial Court. Having adjourned the petition for seven months and attitude of the learned Trial Court in dismissing the petition under Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, would reflect that the social irresponsibility of the learned Trial Court and the plight of childless couple and Surrogacy Act has been enacted as the Welfare act and taking into consideration as to the falling infertility rate among young Indian couples, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remanded to the learned Judicial Magistrate with a direction to take sworn statement afresh and dispose of the same within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The third petitioner who is intended surrogate mother, is a widow and her husband Page 3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/08/2025 05:24:42 pm ) Crl.R.C.(MD)No.981 of 2025 had passed away. The petitioners have duly submitted the death certificate of the petitioner's husband and and the widow certificate of the third petitioner and the same has to be taken into consideration by the learned Trial Court and pass an order favourably.
6.In view of the same, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed. No Costs.
05.08.2025
NCC :Yes/No
Index :Yes/No
Internet : Yes
Mrn
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Uthamapalayam.
Page 4 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/08/2025 05:24:42 pm )
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.981 of 2025
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
Mrn
Crl.R.C.(MD)No.981 of 2025
05.08.2025
Page 5 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/08/2025 05:24:42 pm )