THOSE WHO have been following the travails of the baby born to a surrogate mother of Japanese nationality can only feel sympathy for the infant with three mothers but cared for by a grandmother. The father, Dr Yamada, got the baby conceived by one woman, had the baby born through a surrogate mother and then divorced his first wife and remarried. Along the way, he created a legal tangle which he still has not been able to disengage from.

Although India has become the favoured destination for those who are looking for surrogate mothers for their yet to be born babies as more and more Indian women are prepared to go through surrogacy, the laws have not kept up adequately to cope up with. The Indian laws being so lax with the medical expenses being fairly affordable and wombs readily available, there has been a rise in the country as the favoured destination for surrogate pregnancies.

On the odd occasion, having antiquated laws can be of help too. There is a story as to how the cable TV and mobile telephony revolution took off so well and so fast in India. It is because the laws governing these in the initial days was due to the 19th century Indian Telegraph Act. The law regulating cable television was enacted only in 1995 by which time cable television was firmly entrenched. Similar is the case with mobile telephony – by that the time the relevant telephony was firmly entrenched and had proved itself to be a boon.

But when it comes to personal laws and laws governing family life, such a delay can lead to numerous heart aches. For instance in the case of little Manji, there are several cards stacked against the baby. For instance, though India is the land of the great surrogacy bazaar, there are no laws governing surrogacy in the country and the surrogacy bill meant to regulate it is pending in Parliament. In its absence, the laws that apply quite mirroring the situations cited earlier - are the laws governing adoption - and principally when it comes to foreigners, it would be another 19th century legislation – the Guardians and Wards Act of 1890.

Laws in India are paradoxical because they seldom seem to be in sync with society. On hand we have laws which society has not fully accepted like the laws banning child marriage which are flouted with impunity on occasions like akshya tritiya. Look at the data. According to UNICEF, 82 per cent of girls in Rajasthan, where the practice is particularly widespread, are married by 18; 15 per cent of girls in rural areas across the country are married before 13; and 52 per cent of girls have their first pregnancy between 15 and 19.

Or look at Sati, an act whose practice and glorification has been banned on many occasions. Historically, efforts to prevent Sati by formal means were extent even before the Mughal rulers came to power. Yet as we all know and read about, Sati still happens clandestinely in the country in conservative communities from time to time.

On the other hand, in matters of adoption, succession, divorce and many others including surrogacy society has moved far ahead but laws have not. The adoption laws for all but Hindus are antiquated. The Supreme Court of India, has only in 2007 accepted a petition to make provision for Christians to be able to adopt children legally and the journey ahead is long for Muslims who have not yet even begun. Similarly the divorce provisions for Christians, which was codified in 1869 were modified only in 2003, to reflect modern social realities and again the journey has not even begun for Muslims. And then, of course, we have not even begun thinking properly about emerging areas like surrogate parenting and all that.

Sometimes, I wish that the Uniform Civil Code hadn’t got bogged down in religion based politics and got buried for ever. While the men go and fight out petty battles to score petty points while Bills keep pending in Parliament, women and children suffer like Manji, the daughter of Dr Yamada.