The Supreme Court Verdict on International Custody for Vulnerable Adults

The Supreme Court Verdict on International Custody for Vulnerable Adults

The legal landscape of child custody is complex, but the stakes are significantly heightened when the “child” is a vulnerable adult with a disability. A landmark decision by the Supreme Court of India in Sharmila Velamur v. V. Sanjay and Others (March 2025) addresses a unique dilemma: How do courts handle the custody and movement of an adult citizen of the United States who has a mental disability and is residing in India?

At Legal Light Consulting (LLC), we analyze these intricate cases to provide guidance for NRI families navigating international disability laws and cross-border jurisdictional disputes

The Case Profile: Aadith Ramadorai

The controversy centered on Aadith, a 22-year-old US citizen diagnosed with Ataxic Cerebral Palsy and a mild intellectual disability ($IQ$ of 54).

• Medical Status: Aadith requires family assistance for daily living and decision-making (e.g., property management), though he can perform simple tasks and travel familiar routes alone

• The US Orders: For nearly two decades, the Idaho Court (USA) managed his custody. A crucial Supplemental Custody Order (Clause 13) prohibited either parent from moving the children’s residence to a place that would make the visitation schedule “impractical or significantly more difficult” without prior court approval.

• The Move to India: In 2024, the father (Respondent) brought Aadith to India to live with his grandparents. The mother (Appellant) challenged this, citing the US court orders and alleging a violation of the established custody arrangement.

Key Legal Considerations for NRI Families

1. The Transition from Minor to Vulnerable Adult

Normally, a person becomes independent at 18. However, for individuals with intellectual disabilities, the court’s Parens Patriae (Parent of the Nation) jurisdiction extends into adulthood. The court must decide if the individual possesses the “capacity” to choose their residence or if a guardian must decide for them.

2. Respecting Foreign “Non-Removal” Clauses

The Idaho Court’s direction that neither parent shall move the residence without consent is a common feature in international custody. Indian courts examine:

• Comity of Courts: Respecting the Idaho Court’s long-term involvement (2005–2021).

• The Intent of the Move: Was the move to India for a genuine reason (e.g., caring for elderly grandparents) or an attempt to bypass US visitation rights?

3. Evaluation of Caregiver Capacity

In this case, the history of care was pivotal. The records showed:

• Father’s Role: He took care of supervision, feeding, and self-care independently for years.

• Mother’s Role: She utilized assistance/caregivers for the same tasks.

• Aadith’s Education: He completed 12th grade under an Individual Education Plan (IEP) in the US, specializing in “individual living skills.”

Critical Facts Noted by the Court

FAQ: Disability and International Custody

Q: Can an Indian court decide the custody of a 22-year-old?

A: Yes, if the individual has a disability that renders them incapable of taking care of themselves. The court acts as the “ultimate guardian” to ensure the person is not being neglected or moved against their best interests.

Q: What is the impact of a US “Supplemental Custody Order” in India?

A: While not automatically enforceable, Indian courts give it significant weight as an “input.” If the move to India makes the US court’s visitation schedule “impossible,” the Indian court may order the return of the ward or set a new schedule.

Q: How does the Court determine the “capacity” of a disabled adult?

A: Through a Medical Board assessment. In this case, psychometry and mental status examinations were conducted to see if Aadith could understand the implications of his residence.

Why Consult Legal Light Consulting (LLC)?

Cases like Sharmila Velamur v. V. Sanjay highlight the “eternal dilemma” of Private International Law. Legal Light Consulting assists NRI families in:

• Cross-Border Compliance: Ensuring moves to India do not violate foreign “Non-Removal” or “Supplemental Custody” orders.

• Guardianship for Disabled Adults: Navigating the National Trust Act and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act in India.

• Contempt Petitions: Handling situations where a parent is alleged to have violated a foreign court’s travel or residence conditions.

Educational Disclaimer: This article is based on the Supreme Court proceedings of March 2025. International custody for vulnerable adults is an evolving field of law. For a detailed analysis of your SLP (Special Leave Petition) or custody dispute, please contact Legal Light Consulting directly.

FAQ: The Supreme Court Verdict on International Custody for Vulnerable Adults

The recent judgment in Sharmila Velamur v. V. Sanjay (March 2025) provides critical clarity on how Indian courts handle the custody of adults with intellectual disabilities who are citizens of a foreign country.

At Legal Light Consulting (LLC), we break down the Supreme Court’s reasoning and the practical implications for NRI families.

1. Why did the Supreme Court order Aadith’s return to the US?

The Court applied the “Welfare of the Minor/Vulnerable Adult” test and found that Aadith’s roots were more firmly established in the US than in India. Key factors included:

• Support Systems: He had access to long-term specialized welfare services, a peer group, and a younger brother in the US.

• Language Barrier: Medical experts at NIMHANS noted that Aadith struggled with the language in India, whereas he was fluent and comfortable with the language and lifestyle in the US.

• Educational Continuity: In the US, he was able to hold a job and follow an Individual Education Plan (IEP), whereas in India, he had only received short-term vocational training.

2. Can an adult be forced to return to a foreign country?

Yes, if the court finds they are “incapable of making independent decisions.” The Supreme Court concluded that due to Aadith’s condition (Ataxic Cerebral Palsy and mild intellectual disability), he could not independently decide his place of residence. In such cases, the court exercises Parens Patriae jurisdiction to decide what is best for him.

3. How much weight is given to foreign guardianship orders?

Significant weight. The Court noted that the Idaho Court (US) had already appointed the mother as Aadith’s full and permanent guardian. The Indian Supreme Court respected this “Comity of Courts” principle, noting that the entire family had established a comfortable life in the US before the dispute escalated.

4. What happens to the father’s rights if the child is sent back?

The Court clarified that returning the child to the US does not mean the other parent is removed from the child’s life.

• Shared Access: The Court directed that neither parent should restrict the child’s access to the other.

• Duty to Integrate: The Court stated it is the father’s duty to become a part of the life the son has already established in the US, rather than forcing the son to adapt to a new life in India.

5. What role do medical institutions like NIMHANS play in these cases?

In complex custody matters involving mental health or disability, the Supreme Court relies heavily on independent assessments. The team at NIMHANS, Bengaluru, provided a psychological and mental status assessment that was pivotal in helping the Court understand Aadith’s specific needs and his struggles with the environment in India.

Key Directions from the Judgment

Why Contact Legal Light Consulting (LLC)?

International custody cases involving adults with disabilities are among the most “delicate and complicated” disputes in law. Legal Light Consulting provides:

• Expert Analysis: Understanding the intersection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act and Private International Law.

• Compliance Strategy: Helping parents follow court-mandated timelines for repatriation to avoid contempt of court.

• Liaison Services: Assisting with the administrative hurdles involving consulates and travel documentation.

Educational Purpose Note: This FAQ is based on the Supreme Court’s March 3, 2025, decision. If you are involved in a cross-border guardianship dispute, please contact Legal Light Consulting for specialized legal support.