Supreme Court removes three-month age cap for maternity leave in adoption cases

In a significant ruling strengthening the rights of adoptive mothers and children, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a restrictive provision in the Social Security Code, 2020, that limited maternity benefits for adoptive mothers to cases where the adopted child was below three months of age.

A Bench of Justices J. B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan held that Section 60(4) of the Code was unconstitutional as it violated Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, observing that the three-month age limit was arbitrary and bore no rational connection with the objective of maternity benefits.

"A woman who legally adopts a child below the age of three months or a commissioning mother shall be entitled to maternity benefit for a period of twelve weeks from the date the child is handed over to the adopting mother or the commissioning mother, as the case may be," the judgement reads

The provision had allowed adoptive mothers to avail maternity leave only if they adopted a child younger than three months. The court held that this distinction unfairly excluded a large number of adoptive mothers whose children were older, despite their caregiving responsibilities being identical.

Motherhood is not limited to childbirth

The court emphasised that the purpose of maternity benefits is to support motherhood and caregiving, not merely biological childbirth.

It was observed that adoptive mothers of children above three months are similarly placed to those adopting younger infants in terms of emotional bonding, caregiving responsibilities and the need for time to integrate the child into the family.

The judges held that restricting benefits based on the age of the adopted child created an artificial and discriminatory classification that could not withstand constitutional scrutiny under Article 14.

Adoption is recognised as reproductive autonomy

In an important constitutional observation, the Court recognised adoption as part of reproductive autonomy protected under Article 21.

The ruling said reproductive choices are not confined to biological reproduction and extend to decisions to build a family through adoption.

By placing adoptive motherhood on equal footing with biological motherhood, the court underscored that constitutional protections for dignity, family life and personal autonomy apply equally to adoptive parents.

Best interests of the child

The Court also highlighted that the welfare of the adopted child must remain central to the legal framework governing adoption and parental benefits.

Adequate maternity leave, the Court said, is essential for ensuring that the child receives proper attention and care during the early stages of adjustment within the adoptive family.

Provision found unworkable in practice

Apart from constitutional concerns, the Court noted that the three-month limitation was impractical in the real world.

Under existing adoption procedures, children are usually declared legally free for adoption only after completing several procedural safeguards, which often means that they cross the three-month age threshold before adoption is finalised.

As a result, the Court observed, the law effectively denied maternity benefits to most adoptive mothers despite formally recognising their entitlement.

The judges described this as a legislative anomaly that defeated the very purpose of providing maternity protection.

Law read down

Rather than striking down the provision entirely, the Court chose to read down the law to make it constitutionally compliant.

It ruled that adoptive mothers will now be entitled to 12 weeks of maternity leave from the date of adoption, irrespective of the age of the child.

The Court said this interpretation aligns the law with constitutional guarantees of equality, dignity and the welfare of children.

Push for paternity leave

In a broader observation on caregiving responsibilities, the court also urged the Union government to consider introducing paternity leave as part of the country’s social security framework.

Recognising that childcare is a shared responsibility, the bench said enabling fathers to take leave would promote gender equality and support families during the early stages of parenting.

For adoptive parents across the country, the decision removes a long-standing barrier and recognises that the responsibilities of motherhood begin not with childbirth, but with the commitment to raise and care for a child.