Skip to main content

All you need to know about Surrogacy Law in India

 Surrogacy is defined as a woman carrying a pregnancy and giving birth to a baby to another woman.  This arrangement can be voluntary and gratuitous, as well as, paid as any commercial transaction according to the agreement between the couple and the woman who agrees to bear the child.


Connect with an expert lawyer for your legal issue


In India, all three types of surrogacy are permitted as per law-


Voluntarily


Gratuitous


Monetary Consideration 

 


Is Surrogacy legal in India?

Yes, commercial surrogacy has been legal in India since 2002. But it’s still unregulated in our country, although a draft surrogacy bill 2016 is being finalised by the government.

 


What are the Guidelines laid down by Indian council of Medical Research on Surrogacy?

The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) has set ‘national guidelines’ to regulate surrogacy. It lays down that surrogate mothers need to sign a “contract” with the childless couple. There are no stipulations as to what will happen if this “contract’ is violated.


Surrogacy arrangement will continue to be governed by a contract amongst parties, which will contain all the terms requiring consent of surrogate mother to bear the child, agreement of her husband and other family members for the same, medical procedures of artificial insemination, reimbursement of all reasonable expenses for carrying child to full term, willingness to hand over the child born to the commissioning parent(s), etc. But such an arrangement should not be for commercial purposes.  


A surrogacy arrangement should provide for financial support for the surrogate child in the event of death of the commissioning couple or individual before delivery of the child, or divorce between the intended parents and subsequent willingness of none to take delivery of the child. 


A surrogacy contract should necessarily take care of life insurance cover for surrogate mother. 


One of the intended parents should be a donor as well, because the bond of love and affection with a child primarily emanates from biological relationship. Also, the chances of various kinds of child-abuse, which have been noticed in cases of adoptions, will be reduced. In case the intended parent is single, he or she should be a donor to be able to have a surrogate child. Otherwise, adoption is the way to have a child, which is resorted to if biological (natural) parents and adoptive parents are different. 


Legislation itself should recognise a surrogate child to be the legitimate child of the commissioning parent(s) without there being any need for adoption or even declaration of guardian. 


The birth certificate of the surrogate child should contain the name(s) of the commissioning parent(s) only. 


Right to privacy of donor as well as surrogate mother should be protected. 


Sex-selective surrogacy should be prohibited. 


Cases of abortions should be governed by the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act 1971 only. 


Consult: Top Medical Negligence Lawyers in India

 


What are the guidelines for foreign nationals?

The foreign couple should be duly married and the marriage should have sustained at least for two years at the time of commissioning of surrogacy.


They should enclose a letter from the Embassy of the foreign country in India or the Foreign Ministry of the country with the application stating clearly that:


the country recognizes surrogacy and


the child/children to be born to the commissioning couple through the Indian surrogate mother will be permitted entry into their country as a biological child/children of the couple commissioning surrogacy.


The couple should furnish an undertaking that they would take care of the child/children born through surrogacy.


The treatment should be done only at one of the registered ART Clinics recognized by ICMR.


The couple should produce a duly notarized agreement between the applicant couple and the prospective Indian surrogate mother.


The FRRO/FRO concerned may grant exit to the child/children born through commissioning of surrogacy, subject to the following:-


(a)The OCI/PIO Cardholder had obtained the requisite prior permission from the FRRO/FRO concerned for commissioning surrogacy as mentioned above.


(b) The OCI/PIO Cardholder is carrying a certificate from the ART clinic concerned regarding the fact that the child/children have been duly taken custody of by the OCI/PIO Cardholder and the liabilities towards the Indian surrogate mother have been fully discharged as per the Agreement.


(c) A copy of the Birth Certificate (s) of the surrogate child/children, along with photocopies of the passport and OCI/PIO card of the OCI/PIO cardholder, will have to be submitted by the OCI/PIO cardholder to the FRRO/FRO for record.


(d)The wife of a foreign national or OCI/PIO cardholder (who does not have an OCI/PIO card), who is not involved with the treatment in any way, may not require a specific Medical Visa.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more