Supreme Court Orders Repatriation of US Citizen with Intellectual Disability: Key Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court of India has recently ruled in a significant case involving custody and guardianship of a US citizen with intellectual disabilities. The case, Sharmila Velamur vs. V. Sanjay & Ors., concerned a dispute between the parents of Aadith Ramadorai, a 22-year-old US citizen diagnosed with Ataxic Cerebral Palsy. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the mother, ordering Aadith’s repatriation to the US, where he had spent most of his life, and affirmed her legal guardianship over him.
Background of the Case
The case arose due to a custody dispute between the petitioner, Sharmila Velamur (mother), and respondent no. 4, V. Sanjay (father). Both are US citizens and were previously married. They had two children—Aadith (born in 2003) and Arjun (born in 2005), both of whom have intellectual disabilities. Aadith was diagnosed with Ataxic Cerebral Palsy, while Arjun was diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder.
The parents divorced in 2007 in the United States, and the Idaho District Court granted joint legal and physical custody of both children. As per the custody arrangement:
- The father had custody of the children from Friday 8:00 AM to Monday 8:00 AM.
- The mother had custody from Monday 8:00 AM to Friday 8:00 AM.
- Holidays were divided equally between both parents.
- The court order prohibited either parent from relocating the children without consent.
Father’s Alleged Violation of US Court Orders
In June 2022, Aadith, having reached adulthood, remained with his father, while his younger brother, Arjun, returned to live with his mother. Subsequently, the mother filed a Guardianship Application before the Idaho Court, seeking full and permanent guardianship over Aadith.
Meanwhile, the father opposed the application, arguing that Aadith was capable of independent decision-making and did not require a guardian. During these legal proceedings, the father secretly took Aadith to India on December 31, 2023, without informing the mother.
Upon discovering this, the Idaho Court issued an Emergency Order on February 22, 2024, directing Aadith to return to the US within 72 hours. However, the order was not complied with. On April 9, 2024, after hearing all parties and reviewing medical reports, the Idaho Court appointed the mother as Aadith’s full and permanent guardian.
Legal Proceedings in India
Following the Idaho Court’s ruling, the mother:
- Filed a police complaint in Chennai on January 31, 2024, and again with the NRI Cell on February 5, 2024.
- Filed H.C.P. No. 886/2024 before the Madras High Court, seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus to secure Aadith’s custody.
The Madras High Court, after personally interacting with Aadith, ruled that there was no illegal detention, as Aadith appeared happy staying in Chennai with his father and grandparents. The mother then challenged this ruling before the Supreme Court.
Arguments Before the Supreme Court
Petitioner (Mother) Arguments:
- The High Court failed to properly assess Aadith’s mental capacity and ignored medical evaluations showing his cognitive disabilities.
- Aadith’s entire life and education were in the US, where he received specialized support.
- The Idaho Court had already appointed her as his full guardian.
- The father had manipulated Aadith and was preventing him from interacting freely with his mother.
Respondent (Father) Arguments:
- Aadith was an adult and could make his own decisions.
- He was happy in India and did not wish to return to the US.
- His medical reports from a Chennai hospital showed he was capable of independent decision-making.
- The mother had previously agreed to joint custody.
Supreme Court’s Observations and Ruling
The Supreme Court reviewed medical reports from:
- NIMHANS, Bengaluru
- Institute of Mental Health, Chennai
- Evaluation Committee of Idaho Department of Health
Key findings from these reports included:
- Aadith had an IQ of 53, equivalent to the cognitive ability of an 8 to 10-year-old child.
- He lacked the ability to manage finances, legal decisions, and complex social interactions.
- He required constant guidance and support for daily activities.
- The Idaho medical team concluded he was vulnerable to manipulation.
“Given his mild intellectual disability and associated physical challenges, his overall cognitive functioning is comparable to that of an 8-to-10-year-old child. Consequently, he lacks the ability to make complex, informed decisions independently.”
The Supreme Court ruled that:
- The High Court erred in its judgment by relying only on Aadith’s oral statements.
- The Idaho Court’s decision should be respected.
- Aadith should be repatriated to the US immediately.
- The mother should take full custody, as she was his legally appointed guardian.
Final Directions of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court issued the following directions:
- Aadith must return to the US within 15 days.
- The father must not obstruct his repatriation.
- The US Consulate in Chennai must restore his passport.
- The father must be allowed visitation rights, but custody remains with the mother.
Conclusion
This landmark ruling reinforces the importance of honoring foreign guardianship orders and protecting the rights of individuals with intellectual disabilities. The Supreme Court upheld the best interests of Aadith, ensuring that he continues his specialized education and care in the US. The judgment also serves as a precedent for international custody battles involving vulnerable adults.
Petitioner Name: Sharmila Velamur.Respondent Name: V. Sanjay & Ors..Judgment By: Justice Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan.Place Of Incident: Chennai, Tamil Nadu.Judgment Date: 03-03-2025.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: sharmila-velamur-vs-v.-sanjay-&-ors.-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-03-03-2025.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Child Custody
See all petitions in Legal Malpractice
See all petitions in Judgment by Surya Kant
See all petitions in Judgment by Dipankar Datta
See all petitions in Judgment by Ujjal Bhuyan
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2025
See all petitions in 2025 judgments
See all posts in Civil Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
