Ahmedabad: Within 48 hours of being born, an infant girl became a subject of custody on Thursday as a surrogate mother facing severe criminal charges, including child trafficking, gave birth to the baby.
However, the petitioners approached the Gujarat High Court seeking custody of the child, claiming to be her biological parents by surrogacy agreement.
The Gujarat High Court has ordered the police to stay with the infant until the next hearing date, June 27. The couple, hailing from Rajasthan, alleged that the police and hospital authorities denied to hand over the child to them. However, according to them, the birth mother, a resident of Ahmedabad, signed an accord to give away the baby immediately after birth.
As per the sources, the child was born in an Ahmedabad-based government hospital on June 21 at midnight. Respondents in the case are officials from Ahmedabad civil hospital and Sabarmati jail, the Gujarat government, Gomtipur PI, and the surrogate mother.
The petition referred to the incident as tragic as the authorities deprived the baby of her legal custody for no valid reason. It also stated that taking the child back to the Sabarmati Jail can severely affect her mental well-being and welfare. Further, it disregarded the presence of a separate ward for care of the baby in jail.
As the delivery date came near, the petitioners discovered that the birth mom was a convict and suspect in various criminal offences. On February 18, 2022, the Gomtipur cops lodged a case against her.
Ahmedabad police have charged her under IPC (Indian Penal Code) 363 (kidnapping) and 370 (buying or selling any person). The petition stated that she is also facing charges under IPC 81 (sale and procurement of children for any purpose), 84 (kidnapping and abduction of the child), and 87 (abetment) of the Juvenile Justice Act.
The hospital authorities informed the couple that without a court order, they shall not have custody of the child. On Thursday, the Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court ordered urgent circulation during the first hearing. Later, the subject of habeas corpus moved to Justice Vipul M Pancholi.
During the session, the prosecution argued that her clients had signed a legal agreement with the surrogate dated December 27, 2021. They reasoned, “Neither the petitioners nor the infant is at fault. They are parted by the respondent authorities for no valid or legal causes.”
Read More: Assam Congress Chief Asks Eknath Shinde To Leave Assam
