Sekarreporter: http://youtube.com/post/Ugkx9qSM1o2wUcXAlN9LiwKR9qvjkVTHaQOI?si=47jt5VIjpiJMceE6 [31/07, 16:54] Sekarreporter: Writ petitions filed by intending parents and the treating hospital were heard by Hon’ble Justice N. Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court on 29.07.2025, wherein the petitioners, represented by Ms. A. Shabnam Banu sought for condonation of a procedural lapse in not

[31/07, 16:54] Sekarreporter: http://youtube.com/post/Ugkx9qSM1o2wUcXAlN9LiwKR9qvjkVTHaQOI?si=47jt5VIjpiJMceE6
[31/07, 16:54] Sekarreporter: Writ petitions filed by intending parents and the treating hospital were heard by Hon’ble Justice N. Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court on 29.07.2025, wherein the petitioners, represented by Ms. A. Shabnam Banu sought for condonation of a procedural lapse in not obtaining the mandatory parental order under Section 4(iii)(a)(II) of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021. The 5th respondent, the surrogate mother, is currently nineteen weeks pregnant with twins and was represented by Mr. N. Naren Gautam. The lapse was brought to light by, the treating Hospital, which upon internal scrutiny discovered that the petitioners had not obtained the requisite parental order from a Magistrate prior to embryo transfer. On 30.05.2025, the treating hospital issued a letter to the intending parents, who had by then completed all other statutory requirements, advising them to take legal steps immediately., approached the Court seeking issuance of the parental order in the best interest of the unborn children. The treating Hospital, a pioneer in Assisted Reproductive Technology and surrogacy in India also became a petitioner in the connected matter in W.P. No. 27020 of 2025 in a bonafide and genuine attempt.
The Hon’ble Court took note of the detailed timeline of compliance with all other formalities under the Act. The Court recorded, that the lapse arose from a bonafide misinterpretation of the Supreme Court’s earlier order in IA.No.265857 of 2023 in WP.No. 487 of 2023, which was inadvertently assumed to be equivalent to a parental order by the treating hospital. The Court directed the parties to appear before the Additional Master III on 01.08.2025 for examination, after which the parental order would be passed. The Court clarified that the order shall not be treated as a precedent and noted that the case was being taken as a test instance due to lack of awareness surrounding the newly implemented procedures and to protect the unborn children and surrogate mother. For petitioners in both writ petitions- Ms.Shabnam Banu For respondents 1 to 4- Mr. E.Sundaram For 5th respondent- Mr.Naren Gautam