JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, INDIA VOL. 21, 2022 adoption through the government institutions and, to some extent, it was successful as well. The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, steered the way for significant changes in the law of adoption. Apart from sons’ adoption, girls can also be adopted and a female can also adopt both son and daughter. This adoption was an attempt to make the law more reasonable. But still it continues to be a private affair of parties as far as adoption for the purpose of property, name and spiritual benefits were concerned. By the implementation of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, and Hindus Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, certain problems started arising in inter-country adoption. The problem of trafficking of children from India to other countries and, probably, girls were adopted and taken away from the country. At this stage, the Judiciary made a significant contribution towards regularising inter-country adoption through guidelines in Laxmi Kant Roy v. Union of India.55 In the year 2000, Juvenile Justice Act, which was subsequently, amended in 2015 and named as Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, was enacted and through that Act, the adoption, both inter-country and in-country, were regulated through this Act. An attempt was made to make the adoption equally applicable to all. Moreover, the whole adoption process has been institutionalised. The Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA) was established by the Government of India in 1990 and various rules were framed. These rules were amended till 2022. Under CARA, now, we can say that the adoption process is very transparent, responsive and time-bound. However, the nature of the proceedings under CARA have become technical and a few issues and doubts arise, which lead to delay and breach of privacy of the parents. CARA guidelines had named the children as surrendered, orphan, abandoned, etc.,56 which needs to be avoided, considering that the child is a precious gift by the God and to be nurtured in the same way. These children may be named as “Institutionalised Children”. Their background is not necessary as it amounts to name calling and will carry as a stigma throughout their life. It must be avoided. The whole adoption process under CARA has been digitalised through which the main objective of Act 2015 is being defeated. The welfare of the child as paramount is being compromised because it is the parents who have been given choice under the CARA guidelines to select the child for adoption out of three-four children offered to them by the Child Care 55 56 88 AIR 1987, Supreme Court 232 Regulation 6 & 7 of Adoption Regulations, 2022