The controversy over the adoption of a newborn in Thiruvanthapuram, Kerala capital, has acquired a distinct political hue with the government asserting that there is nothing illegal about it and the opposition accusing the government of abetting it.
The controversy came to light when Anupama S. Chandran, a former Students Federation of India (SFI) member, accused her parents of giving away her baby, born out of wedlock, for adoption without her knowledge. Anupama alleged that CPI(M) leaders and Kerala State Council for Child Welfare(KSCCW) had helped her father, who is Perurkada CPI(M) local committee member P S Jayachandran, to facilitate the adoption. The Perurkada police have filed a case against Anupama’s parents following her complaint.
The CPI(M), for once, acted without much loss of time by asking Jayachandran to stay away from organizational activities until further notice. Reports have it that this could be the thin end of the wedge as further disciplinary action could be taken against the Perurkada local committee member. The party also constituted a three-member committee to probe the matter. It is learnt that majority of the members who attended the local committee meeting which recommended the investigation felt that Jayachandran’s action had brought a bad name to the party. Some of them opined that giving away the baby for adoption without the consent of the mother is illegal.
In another development, Anupama’s parents and four others accused of kidnapping the infant and giving it away for adoption have moved the additional district and sessions court seeking anticipatory bail. It may be mentioned that the police have not yet questioned the six accused. They police said they were waiting for solid evidence to emerge for beginning the interrogation.
Anupama delivered the baby on October 19, 2020. The baby was handed over to the KSCCW on October 23. Anupama had filed a complaint on April 15 this year. Another complaint was filed on April 19 saying that the baby had not been handed over to her. Police had given receipts for both the complaints too. The police registered a case against the accused only after Anupama filed another complaint to the police DGP Anil Kant.
The basis of the oposition’s charge is that the government and the CPI(M) were anxious to protect the ‘family honour’ as she had conceived the child out of wedlock and also because the father belongs to a lower caste. She had married the biological father of the baby later. They characterised the entire episode as a ‘CPI(M)-orchestrated honour crime’.
The controversy saw a heated debate in the state Assembly as well. The opposition staged a walkout after the Speaker denied permission to move an adjournment motion. Raising the issue, Revolutionary Marxist Party (RMP) MLA K K Rema said the KSCCW even tried to change the identity of the child.
The Left Democratic Front (LDF) government, on its part, asserted that there was nothing illegal about the adoption. Women and Child Welfare Minister Veena George said the Thiruvananthapuram family court had stayed the adoption proceedings following the filing of a petition by the government. The minister had conveyed the decision to Anupama and the latter ended her fast before the secretariat in the state capital. The mother’s request is right and the baby should live with the mother, Veena said. Kerala Women’s Commission chairperson P Sathidevi also assured Anupama of legal assistance should she need it.
Meanwhile, the family court has ordered the withholding of adoption proceedings of the baby. The government pleader representing the State Adoption Resource Agency (SARA) informed the court that there was a controversy over the adoption and an enquiry was going on into the matter. The court then ordered a temporary withholding of the adoption procedures. The court also asked the police to submit the investigation report in a sealed cover. The case will now come up for hearing on November 1.
Till then, the baby will remain with the prospective adoptive parents from Andhra Pradesh. As per the rules, they can have the custody of the baby till the court passes a final order sanctioning the adoption. The court also said that a DNA test will have to be done to identify whether the baby belongs to Anupama.
The upshot of it all is that the government and the party have acted relatively fast, for a change. The party must follow it up with deterrent action if the party panel comes out with a report finding the accused guilty. That will help the CPI(M) and the gGovernment to occupy the moral high ground and also deprive the opposition of a potent weapon to harass it. The legal and political battle is right on, and Kerala is waiting for the next act in the politico-legal saga.
(By P. Sreekumaran/IPA)
