Thank you for you the comment. I only wish that things are as simple as you consider them to be. Issues of Nationality has a lot of weight in surrogacy cases due to differential citizenship and nationality laws in every state is different. The Report of the law commission or the draft law on surrogacy do not have any value as those are not laws which have been passed by the parliament and which have obtained the assent of the President. These documents are not enforceable.

Thank you for your resourceful comment. I think you have not understood the question of law before the Supreme Court at this moment. According to the surrogacy agreement entered between the surrogate mother and intended parents, the surrogate mother had agreed to relinquish the rights she had over the child. This agreement’s entered even before the implantation of the embryo in the surrogate mother’s womb. Arguments stating that the surrogate mother is the legal mother and not intended parents for the purpose of citizenship of the child is derogatory of the surrogacy agreement itself. Since the Supreme Court had already held in Manji’s case that the surrogacy agreements are valid in law, can the Supreme Court be without giving effect to the terms as found in the agreement? This is the exactly legal position.

In your question you have presumed that the surrogate mother is the legal mother of the child. When you have a surrogacy agreement to the contrary, how do you make this claim?

Thank you for posting your views.

G R Hari,
Partner, ISLC

Tx