{"id":205059,"date":"2005-10-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-10-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005"},"modified":"2018-08-19T16:54:54","modified_gmt":"2018-08-19T11:24:54","slug":"st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005","title":{"rendered":"St. Theresa’S Tender Loving Care … vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
St. Theresa’S Tender Loving Care … vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005<\/div>\n
Author: A Pasayat<\/div>\n
Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Arun Kumar<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  6492 of 2005\n\nPETITIONER:\nSt. Theresa's Tender Loving Care Home & Ors.\t\t\t\t        \n\nRESPONDENT:\nState of Andhra Pradesh\t\t\t\t\t\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 24\/10\/2005\n\nBENCH:\nARIJIT PASAYAT & ARUN KUMAR\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
J U D G M E N T
\n(Arising out of S.L.P (C) No.9412 of 2003)<\/p>\n
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n
\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe basic issue involved in this appeal is whether the
\nappellant no.1 should be permitted to make arrangement for
\nadoption of a child named Sahiti presently about five years
\nby appellant nos. 2 and 3. Appellant no.1 claims to be an
\norganization interested in the welfare of abandoned children
\nand to secure a congenial atmosphere for their upbringing.
\nChallenge in this appeal is to an order dated 23.12.2002
\npassed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing the
\nappeal purported to have been filed under Section 19(1) of
\nthe Family Courts Act, 1984 (in short the ‘Act’) and Section
\n47 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (in short the
\n‘Guardians Act’). The appeal before the Andhra Pradesh High
\nCourt was filed by the appellants questioning correctness of
\nthe order dated 8.7.2002 passed by the learned Judge, Family
\nCourt, Secunderabad, rejecting the prayer made by the
\nappellants under Sections 7 to 10 of the Guardian Act.
\nStand of the appellants before the Family Court was that it
\nis a society registered under the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana
\nArea) Public Societies Registration Act, 1350 Fasli (in
\nshort ‘Societies Act’) purportedly for carrying social
\nservice activities.  One of its main objectives is to
\nprovide shelter to abandoned children more particularly by
\nunwed mothers, and as noted above to see them comfortably
\nsettled in adopted homes.  The appellants 2 and 3 are
\nresidents of U.S.A.  According to petition they were married
\non 19.10.1999.  They had earlier adopted one son, but wanted
\nto adopt a female child from India and for that purpose
\nwanted to adopt the girl named Sahiti, born on 14.6.2000.
\nThe claim that they are well settled in life with decent
\nincome,  would be eligible for adopting the child and also
\nwere sure to provide a happy home to the adopted child.  The
\nminor child Sahiti was stated to be daughter of an unmarried
\nmother by name Esther, a native of Hyderabad and earning
\nlivelihood as a labourer. Due to social stigma she
\nrelinquished the child in favour of the appellant no.1 on
\n14.6.2000 and executed a Relinquishment Deed. The child
\nsuffered from various ailments and her adoption in India did
\nnot materialize.  On that ground the Voluntary Coordination
\nAgency( in short ‘VCA’) gave clearance for the minor to be
\ngiven in adoption abroad.  It was stated in the petition
\nthat inquiries made by appellant no.1 revealed that none of
\nher relatives were ready and willing to take care of the
\nminor. Since 14.6.2000 the child has been under the care and
\ncustody of appellant no.1.  The State of Andhra Pradesh
\nrepresented by the Director of Women Development and Child
\nWelfare Department resisted the claim.  Their stand was that
\nit had come to the notice of the Government that some
\nunscrupulous organizations in Andhra Pradesh were indulging
\nin child trafficking. With a view to curb menaces, the
\nGovernment had issued G.O.Ms. No.16 of 2001 banning
\nrelinquishment of a child.  Since the claim of the appellant
\nwas based primarily on a Relinquishment Deed purported to
\nhave been executed by the mother of the child, inquiry was
\ndirected to be conducted by the Crime Branch of CID along
\nwith other cases.  After inquiry, Crime Branch (CID)
\nreported that the Relinquishment Deed was a fake and
\nfabricated document and the witnesses to the Relinquishment
\nDeed were employees of appellant no.1. Therefore, paper
\nnotification dated 4.6.2001 was made calling for claims by
\nbiological parents within 30 days in respect of child Sahiti
\nand eight other cases.  The Government of India had also
\naddressed to the Central Adoption Resource Agency ( in short
\n‘CARA’) about the false claim made by appellant no.1 and
\nrequested to initiate action against appellant no.1. The
\nFamily Court rejected the application holding that the VCA
\nissued no objection certificate on the ground that Indian
\nparents had refused to adopt the child on the ground that
\nshe was suffered from skin disease.  The Family Court was of
\nthe view that the so called reasons did not merit
\nacceptance.  The child was also referred to child study
\nreport which indicated that the child did not suffer from
\nany ailment. It was noted that letters of rejection by
\nIndian parents were not filed and the efforts of VCA for in
\ncounty adoption were not established.  It was noted that the
\neffort was to be made in the light of decision of this Court
\nin Lakshmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India<\/a> (1984 (2) SCC 244).
\nIt was noted that in term of G.O.Ms. No.16 of 2001
\nrelinquishment of a child by biological parents on grounds
\nof poverty, number of children or unwanted girl child could
\nnot be permitted. Accordingly the petition filed was
\nrejected.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe view of the Family Court was affirmed by the High
\nCourt.  High Court noticed that appellant no.1 based its
\nclaim on fabricated document and there was no genuine effort
\nto see that the child was adopted by Indian parents.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn support of the appeal learned counsel for the
\nappellants submitted that all possible efforts have been
\nmade to see that the child is adopted by Indian parents.  It
\nis not a fact that the child was not suffering from
\nailments.  If the child is kept in the care and custody of
\nthe respondent no.1 and is sent to the children’s home it
\nwould be traumatic for the child who has spent five years
\nwith the appellant no.1 quite happily.  The State Government
\nhas accepted in public interest litigation that the children
\nwho have been transferred to Shishu Vihar run by the State
\nGovernment are in a very pathetic condition.  More than 100
\nchildren have lost their lives due to negligence on the part
\nof the authority running the home and because of poor
\nmedical care, and even many of the children have ran away.
\nIt is stated that all possible efforts have been made to
\nfind out Indian parents without success.  The request of
\nappellants 2 and 3 for adopting the child should have been
\naccepted as they were willing to adopt the child. Because of
\nprolonged litigation, they have shown some reluctance.
\nTherefore, permission should be given to appellant no.1 to
\narrange adoption by way of inter-country adoption.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn Lakshmi Kant Pandey case (supra) the guidelines and
\nthe norms to be followed in the case of adoption by
\nforeigners were indicated in detail.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt is obvious that in a civilized society the
\nimportance of child welfare cannot be over-emphasized,
\nbecause the welfare of the entire community, its growth and
\ndevelopment, depends on the health and well-being of its
\nchildren. Children are a “supremely important national
\nasset” and the future well-being of the nation depends on
\nhow its children grow and develop. The great poet Milton put
\nit admirably when he said : “Child shows the man as morning
\nshows the day” and the Study Team on Social Welfare said
\nmuch to the same effect when it observed that “the physical
\nand mental health of the nation is determined largely by the
\nmanner in which it is shaped in the early stages”. The child
\nis a soul with a being, a nature and capacities of its own,
\nwho must be helped to find them, to grow into their maturity
\ninto fullness of physical and vital energy and the utmost
\nbreath, depth and height of its emotional, intellectual and
\nspiritual being; otherwise there cannot be a healthy growth
\nof the nation. The child is father of the man, said
\nWordsworth in “My Heart Leaps up”. Now, obviously children
\nneed special protection because of their tender age and
\nphysique, mental immaturity and incapacity to look after
\nthemselves. That is why there is a growing realisation in
\nevery part of the globe that children must be brought up in
\nan atmosphere of love and affection and under the tender
\ncare and attention of parents so that they may be able to
\nattain full emotional, intellectual and spiritual stability
\nand maturity and acquire self-confidence and self-respect
\nand a balanced view of life with full appreciation and
\nrealisation of the role which they have to play in the
\nnation building process. Without that the nation cannot
\ndevelop and attain real prosperity because a large segment
\nof the society would then be left out of the developmental
\nprocess. In India this consciousness is reflected in the
\nprovisions enacted in the Constitution of India, 1950 (in
\nshort the ‘Constitution’). Clause (3) of Article 15 enables
\nthe State to make special provision, inter-alia, for
\nchildren and Article 24 provides that no child below the age
\nof fourteen years shall be employed to work in any factory
\nor mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment.
\nClauses (e) and (f) of Article 39 provide that the State
\nshall direct its policy towards securing inter-alia that the
\ntender age of children is not abused, that citizens are not
\nforced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to
\ntheir age an strength and that children are given
\nopportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner
\nand in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood
\nand youth are protected against exploitation and against
\nmoral and material abandonment. These constitutional
\nprovisions reflect the great anxiety of the constitution
\nmakers to protect and safeguard the interest and welfare of
\nchildren in the country.  As was observed by a learned
\nJustice Children are innocent, vulnerable and dependent.
\nAbondoning children and encluding good foundation of life
\nfor them is a crime against humanity.  Children cannot and
\nshould not be treated as chattels or saleable commodities or
\nplay things.  For full and harmonious development of their
\npersonality, children should grow up in an atmosphere of
\nhappiness, love and understanding.  In old Testament
\nProverbs , XXII it is said “Train up a child in the way he
\nshould go, and when he is old, he will not depart from it”.
\nIn “The Crescent Moon” Rabindranath Tagore said “I do not
\nlove him because he is good, but because he is my little
\nchild”.  The Government of India has also in pursuance of
\nthese constitutional provisions evolved a National Policy
\nfor the Welfare of Children. This Policy starts with a goal-
\noriented perambulatory introduction:
\n\tThe nation’s children are a supremely
\nimportant asset. Their nurture and solicitude are
\nour responsibility. Children’s programme should
\nfind a prominent part in out national plans for
\nthe development of human resources, so that our
\nchildren grow up to become robust citizens,
\nphysically fit, mentally alert and morally
\nhealthy, endowed with the skills and motivations
\nneeded by society. Equal opportunities for
\ndevelopment to all children during the period of
\ngrowth should be our aim, for this would serve out
\nlarger purpose of reducing inequality and ensuring
\nsocial justice.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe measures are designed to protect children against
\nneglect, cruelty and exploitation and to strengthen family
\nties “so that full potentialities of growth of children are
\nrealised within the normal family neighborhood and community
\nenvironment”. The National Policy also lays down priority in
\nprogramme formation and it gives fairly high priority to
\nmaintenance, education and training of orphan and destitute
\nchildren. There is also provision in the National Policy for
\nconstitution of a National Children’s Board. It is the
\nfunction of the National Children’s Board to provide a focus
\nfor planning, review and proper coordination of the
\nmultiplicity of services striving to meet the needs of
\nchildren and to ensure at different levels continuous
\nplanning, review and coordination of all the essential
\nservice.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe essence of the directions given in Lakshmi Kant
\nPandey case (supra) is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
(1)Every effort must be made first to see if
\nthe child can be rehabilitated by adoption
\nwithin the country and if that is not
\npossible, then only adoption by foreign
\nparents, or as it is some time called ‘inter-
\ncountry adoption’ should be acceptable.
\n(2) Such inter-country adoption should be
\npermitted after exhausting the possibility of
\nadoption within the country by Indian
\nparents.\n<\/p>\n
(3) There is a great demand for adoption of
\nchildren from India and consequently there is
\nincreasing danger of ill-equipped and
\nsometimes even undesirable organisations or
\nindividuals activising themselves in the
\nfield of inter-county adoption with a view to
\ntrafficking in children.\n<\/p>\n
(4) Following are the requirements which
\nshould be insisted upon so far as a foreigner
\nwishing to take a child in adoption is
\nconcerned. In the first place, every
\napplication from a foreigner desiring to
\nadopt a child must be sponsored by a social
\nor child welfare agency recognised or
\nlicensed by the government of the country in
\nwhich the foreigner is resident. No
\napplication by foreigner for taking a child
\nin adoption should be entertained directly by
\nany social or welfare agency in India working
\nin the area of inter-country adoption or by
\nany institution or centre or home to which
\nchildren are committed by the juvenile court.
\nThis is essential primarily for three
\nreasons.\n<\/p>\n
Firstly, it will help to reduce, if not
\neliminate altogether, the possibility of
\nprofiteering and trafficking in children,
\nbecause if a foreigner were allowed to
\ncontact directly agencies or individuals in
\nIndia for the purpose of obtaining a child in
\nadoption, he might, in his anxiety to secure
\na child for adoption, be induced or persuaded
\nto pay any unconscionable or unreasonable
\namount which might be demanded by the agency
\nor individual procuring the child. Secondly
\nit would be almost impossible for the court
\nto satisfy itself that the foreigner who
\nwishes to take the child in adoption would be
\nsuitable as a parent for the child and
\nwhether he would be able to provide a stable
\nand secure family life to the child and would
\nbe able to handle trans-racial, trans-
\ncultural and trans-national problems likely
\nto arise from such adoption, because, where
\nthe application for adopting a child has not
\nbeen sponsored by a social or child welfare
\nagency in the country of the foreigner, there
\nwould be no proper and satisfactory home
\nstudy report on which the court can rely.
\nThirdly, in such a case, where the
\napplication of a foreigner for taking a child
\nin adoption is made directly without the
\nintervention of a social or child welfare
\nagency, there would be no authority or agency
\nin the country of the foreigner who could be
\nmade responsible for supervising the progress
\nof the child and ensuring that the child is
\nadopted at the earliest in accordance with
\nlaw and grows up in an atmosphere of warmth
\nand affection with moral and material
\nsecurity assured to it. The record shows that
\nin every foreign country where children form
\nIndia are taken in adoption, there are social
\nand child welfare agency licensed or
\nrecognised by the government and it would not
\ntherefore use any difficulty, hardship or
\ninconvenience if it is insisted that every
\napplication form a foreigner for taking a
\nchild in adoption must be sponsored by a
\nsocial or child welfare agency licensed or
\nrecognised by the government of the county in
\nwhich the foreigner resides. It is not
\nnecessary that there should be only one
\nsocial or child welfare agency in the foreign
\ncountry through which an application for
\nadoption of a child may be routed; there may
\nbe more than one such social or child welfare
\nagencies, but every such social or child
\nwelfare agency must be licensed or recognised
\nby the government of the foreign country and
\nthe court should not make an order for
\nappointment of the foreign country and the
\ncourt should not make an rode for appointment
\nof a foreigner as guardian unless it is
\nsatisfied that the application of the
\nforeigner for adopting a child has been
\nsponsored by such social or child welfare
\nagency.\n<\/p>\n
(5) The position in regard to biological
\nparents of the child proposed to be taken in
\nadoption has to be noted. What are the
\nsafeguards which are required to be provided
\ninsofar as biological parents are concerned?
\nWe may make it clear at the outset that when
\nwe talk about biological parents, we mean
\nboth parents if they are together or the
\nmother or the father if either is alone. Now
\nit should be regarded as an elementary
\nrequirement that if the biological parents
\nare known, they should be properly assisted
\nin making a decision about relinquishing the
\nchild for adoption, by the institution or
\ncenter or home for child care or social or
\nchild welfare agency to which the child is
\nbeing surrendered. Before a decision is taken
\nby the biological parents to surrender the
\nchild for adoption, they should be helped to
\nunderstand all the implications of adoption
\nincluding the possibility of adoption by a
\nforeigner and they should be told
\nspecifically that in case the child is
\nadopted, it would not be possible for them to
\nhave any further contact with the child. The
\nbiological parents should to be subjected to
\nany duress in making a decision about
\nrelinquishment and even after they have taken
\na decision to relinquish the child for giving
\nin adoption, a further period of about three
\nmonths should be allowed to them to
\nreconsider their decision.\n<\/p>\n
(6) But in order to eliminate any possibility
\nof mischief and to make sure that the child
\nhas in fact been surrendered by its
\nbiological parents, it is necessary that the
\ninstitution or center or home for child care
\nor social or child welfare agency to which
\nthe child is surrendered by the biological
\nparents, should take from the biological
\nparents a document of surrender duty signed
\nby the biological parents and attested by at
\nleast two responsible persons and such
\ndocument of surrender should not only contain
\nthe names of the biological parents and their
\naddress but also information in regard to the
\nbrother of the child and its background,
\nhealth and development.\n<\/p>\n
But where the child is an orphan, destitute
\nor abandoned child and its parents are not
\nknown, the institution or center or home for
\nchild card or hospital or social or child
\nwelfare agency in whose care the child has
\ncome, must try to trace the biological
\nparents of the child and if the biological
\nparents can be traced name it is found that
\nthey do not want to take back the child, then
\nthe same procedure as outlined above should
\nas far as possible be followed. But if for
\nany reason the biological parents cannot be
\ntraced, then there can be no question of
\ntaking their consent or consulting them. It
\nmay also be pointed out that the biological
\nparents should not be induced or encouraged
\nor even be permitted to take a decision in
\nregard to giving of a child in adoption
\nbefore the birth of the child or within a
\nperiod of three months from the date of
\nbirth. This precaution is necessary because
\nthe biological parents must have reasonable
\ntime after the birth of the child to take a
\ndecision whether to rear up the child
\nthemselves or to relinquish it for adoption
\nand moreover it may be necessary to allow
\nsome time to the child to overcome any health
\nproblems experienced after birth.\n<\/p>\n
(7)\tOf course, it would be desirable if a
\nCentral Adoption Resource Agency is set up by
\nthe Government of India with regional
\nbranches at a few centers which are active in
\ninter-country adoptions. Such Central
\nAdoption Research Agency can act as a
\nclearing house of information in regard to
\nchildren available for inter-country adoption
\nand all applications by foreigners for taking
\nIndian children in adoption can then be
\nforwarded by the social or child welfare
\nagency in the foreign country to such Central
\nAdoption Resource Agency and the latter can
\nin its turn forward agencies in the courts.
\nEvery social or child welfare agency taking
\nchildren under its care can then be required
\nto sent to such Central Adoption Resource
\nAgency the names and particulars of children
\nunder its care who are available for adoption
\nand the names and particulars of such
\nchildren can be entered in a register to be
\nmaintained by such Central Adoption Resource
\nAgency.”\n<\/p>\n
\tIn terms of this Court’s decision in Lakshmi Kant
\nPandey case (supra), CARA was formed and it published
\n“Guidelines for adoption”.  Under these guidelines every
\nState has a VCA to co-ordinate and oversees inter-state
\nadoptions.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt is pointed by Mr. Colin Gonsalves who was requested
\nto assist in the matter though the intervention application
\nfiled by him on behalf of Parchuri Jamuna was rejected, that
\nin some States the VCA is a non-governmental organization
\n(in short ‘NGO’) and in some other States the Department of
\nWomen and Child Development.  In the State of Andhra
\nPradesh, the said Department is VCA. Several guidelines have
\nbeen issued from time to time.  The Government of India,
\nMinistry of Welfare has also issued directions.  On the
\nbasis of Lakshmi Kant Pandey case (supra) the Government of
\nIndia has issued certain guidelines vide its
\nResolutionNo.13-33\/85-CH(AC) dated 4th July, 1989.
\nSubsequently, some clarifictory orders were passed by this
\nCourt on 19th September, 1989, 14th August, 1991, 29th
\nOctober, 1991, 14th November, 1991 and 20th November,
\n1991.  A Task Force was constituted on 12th August, 1992
\nunder chairmanship of retired Chief Justice of this Court.
\nReport was submitted by the Task Force on 28.8.1993.  On the
\nbasis of the recommendations made certain guidelines were
\nalso issued by the Ministry of Welfare Resolution dated
\n29th May, 1995.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn the background of what has been noticed by the
\nFamily Court and the High Court it is crystal clear that the
\norders passed do not suffer from any infirmity to warrant
\ninterference.  It has been printed out by learned counsel
\nfor the State and Mr. Gonsalves, that the appellant no. 1
\nhas been prosecution for offences punishable under various
\nprovisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short’IPC’).
\nThe accusations relate to cheating, manipulation\/fabrication
\nof documents.  Some of the functionaries of the appellant
\nno. 1 have already been convicted while permitting any
\norganization to keep a child or give him or her in adoption
\nits credentials are to be minutely scrutinized.  It should
\nbe ensured that behind the mask of social service or
\nupliftment and evil design of child trafficking is not
\nlurking.   It is the duty of the State to ensure a safe roof
\nover an abandoned child.  Keeping in view the welfare of the
\nchild all possible efforts should be made by the State
\nGovernments to explore e possibility of adoption under the
\nsupervision of the designated agency.  Keeping in view the
\nguidelines indicated by this Court in Lakshmi Kant Pandey
\ncase (supra) adoption by foreign parents may in appropriate
\ncases be permitted.\n<\/p>\n
\tWhile making the requisite and prescribed  exercise it
\nhas to be kept in mind that child is a precious gift and
\nmerely because he or she for various reasons is abandoned by
\nthe parents that cannot be a reason for further neglect by
\nthe society.  It is urged that some account of vehemence by
\nlearned counsel for the appellants that the children homes
\nrun by the State Governments are really no place when a
\nchild is to be placed.  They suffer from neglect, proper
\ncare is a myth and a large number of children have lost
\ntheir lives or are unable to bear the cruelties meted out.
\nIf the grievances are true, it is a matter of serious
\nconcern. The Central Government and the State Government
\nwould do well to look at these problems with the
\nhumanitarian approach and concern they deserve.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt would be appropriate for them to keep the following
\nlines from Longfellows “The Children’s Hour” in mind.
\n“Between the dark and the daylight, when the night is
\nbeginning to lower, comes a pause in the day’s occupations,
\nthat is known as the Children’s Hours”\n<\/p>\n
\tWith the aforesaid observations the appeal is dismissed
\nwith no orders as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India St. Theresa’S Tender Loving Care … vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005 Author: A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Arun Kumar CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 6492 of 2005 PETITIONER: St. Theresa’s Tender Loving Care Home & Ors. RESPONDENT: State of Andhra Pradesh DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24\/10\/2005 BENCH: ARIJIT PASAYAT […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-205059","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nSt. Theresa'S Tender Loving Care ... vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"St. Theresa'S Tender Loving Care ... vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-10-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-19T11:24:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"St. Theresa’S Tender Loving Care … vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-10-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-19T11:24:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005\"},\"wordCount\":3977,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005\",\"name\":\"St. Theresa'S Tender Loving Care ... vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-10-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-19T11:24:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"St. Theresa’S Tender Loving Care … vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"St. Theresa'S Tender Loving Care ... vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"St. Theresa'S Tender Loving Care ... vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-10-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-19T11:24:54+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"St. Theresa’S Tender Loving Care … vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005","datePublished":"2005-10-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-19T11:24:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005"},"wordCount":3977,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005","name":"St. Theresa'S Tender Loving Care ... vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-10-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-19T11:24:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/st-theresas-tender-loving-care-vs-state-of-andhra-pradesh-on-24-october-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"St. Theresa’S Tender Loving Care … vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 October, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/205059","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=205059"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/205059\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=205059"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=205059"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=205059"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}