Interim Decision #2118 

MATTER OF PUREWAL 

In Visa Petition Proceedings 

A-19863293 

Decided by Board January 7, 1972 

Under the Hindu Adoptiond and Maintenance Act of 1956 of India, applicable to 

any person who is a Sikh by religion, the adoption of a son is invalid if the 

adoptive father or mother has a son (whether by legitimate blood relationship 

or by adoption) living at the time of the adoption. 

This is an appeal from a decision of the District Director denying 

a visa petition filed to accord the beneficiary status as the brother 

of a citizen of the United States pursuant to section 203(a)(5) of the 

Immigration and Nationality Act. The District Director concluded 

that the petitioner has not established that the beneficiary is her 

brother within the meaning of the Act. We affirm the decision and 

dismiss the appeal. 

The petitioner is a 35-year-old married female, a native of India, 

who became a naturalized citizen of the United States on September 19, 1963. The beneficiary is an unmarried male, who was born 

in India in January 1948. The petitioner claims that the beneficiary is her brother because of the adoption of the beneficiary by the 

petitioner's father. In support of this claimed relationship, the 

petitioner presented in evidence a document dated January 10, 

1957, which purports to effect an adoption of the beneficiary by the 

petitioner's father. 

The issue in this case is whether there was a valid adoption. To 

determine the validity of the adoption, we must look to the 

applicable adoption law. Inasmuch as the adoption was supposed 

to have been accomplished in India, we must look to the provisions 

of the Hindu law. 

The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956, which came 

into operation on December 21, 1956, applies to any person who is 

a Sikh by religion.i The alleged adoptive father and adopted son 

belong to the Sikh religion and are subject to this Act. The Act 

makes invalid the adoption of a son if the adoptive father or 

1Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, Section 2(1)(b): "This Act 

applies to any person who io a Buddhist, Solna or Sikh by religion." 

4 
Interim Decision #2118 

mother has a son (whether by legitimate blood relationship or by 

adoption) living at the time of the adoption? Since the petitioner's 

father has three sons who were living at the time of the alleged 

adoption, the document which purports to effect an adoption of the 

beneficiary by the petitioner's father does not meet the requirements of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956 and 

does not constitute a valid adoption. 

On appeal petitioner asserted that there was a valid adoption 

long before the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956 

went into effect because adoption is permissible according to 

family custom and usage as well as by Sikh religious tradition. 

Although the Hindu law recognized adoptions prior to the Hindu 

Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956, a Hindu could not take a 

son by adoption if he had a son, grandson or great grandson 

(natural or adopted) living at the time of adoption. This position 

was upheld by the High Court of Bombay in Bharmappa v. 

Ujjangauda (1922), 46 Boni. 455. 

Since we find that there was no valid adoption of the beneficiary 

by the petitioner's father, the District Director was correct in 

holding that the petitioner has not borne the burden of establishing that the beneficiary is her brother pursuant to section 203(a)(5) 

of the Act. Accordingly, the following order will be entered. 

ORDER:It is ordered that the appeal be and the same is hereby 

dismissed. 

2 Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, Section 11(i): "In every adoption, the following conditions must be complied with:—if the adoption is of a son, 

the adoptive father or mother by whom the adoption is made must not have a 

Hindu son, son's son or son's son's son (whether by legitimate blood relationship 

or by adoption) living at the time of adoption." 

5