Competence of Giving Adoption:
This section confers the competence to give a child in adoption only to certain persons, namely the father, the mother, and the guardian of the child to be given in adoption.

Is it necessary for the father, mother, or guardian giving a child in adoption to be a Hindu?
Section 9 does not expressly state that the father, mother, or guardian must be a Hindu in order to have the capacity to give the child in adoption. On the other hand, Sections 7 and 8, which deal with the capacity to take in adoption, expressly state that the father or mother must be a Hindu by using the expressions "Male Hindu" and "Female Hindu."

Prima facie, therefore, it would appear that the persons giving the adoption need not be Hindus. However, upon closer scrutiny, it becomes clear that the father or mother must also be a Hindu at the time of giving the child in adoption.

Under Section 9(3), the mother acquires the right to give the child in adoption if the father has ceased to be a Hindu. This presupposes that the father loses his right to give the child in adoption the moment he ceases to be a Hindu. Furthermore, the mother's consent is not necessary for the father to give the child in adoption if she has ceased to be a Hindu. In other words, she loses her right to give her consent the moment she ceases to be a Hindu. If even the right to give consent is lost when the mother ceases to be a Hindu, it would be illogical for her to retain the right to give a child in adoption under such circumstances. The preamble states that the Act relates to adoption among Hindus and not merely to those who are Hindus. Therefore, it appears that all parties connected with the transaction of adoption should be Hindus.

Even regarding a guardian, it is not stated that he must be a Hindu. A guardian appointed by a court for a Hindu minor need not necessarily be a Hindu. However, as pointed out, since the Act is one relating to adoption among Hindus, it is submitted that all parties to the transaction of adoption, including the person giving the adoption, must be Hindus. It follows, therefore, that if a guardian is to exercise the power of giving in adoption, he must be a Hindu.

The position under the old Hindu law was different. Even if a person converted to another religion, he did not lose his right to give in adoption by reason of the Caste Disabilities Removal Act of 1850, as interpreted by the Courts. However, it was held that the convert must delegate the power to give in adoption to a Hindu since, under the old law, the physical act of giving the child had to be accompanied by certain ceremonies. Now, under the present Act, no ceremonies are necessary; mere giving and taking are sufficient.

Therefore, if a convert is entitled to give in adoption, he could do so himself without delegating the power to a Hindu. As pointed out, the position under the Act is that a guardian who is a convert has no power to give in adoption. It thus seems that a convert to another religion is placed at a greater disadvantage under the Act than under the old Hindu law. The whole object and purpose of the Act was to make adoption a secular act and to liberalize the law relating to adoption. However, in this regard, the effect seems to have been the contrary.