Back
RANGANATH MISRA, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH, P.B.SAWANT
Gaurav Jain – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized without referencing specific case law citations:
The case involves a Public Interest Litigation concerning the welfare of children born to prostitutes, emphasizing the importance of their rights and social integration [judgement_subject].
The petitioner, through an advocate, sought directions for establishing separate schools with vocational training facilities and separate hostels for children of prostitutes (!) .
The Court considered the proposal for segregating these children into separate institutions but ultimately rejected this idea, emphasizing that such segregation would not be in the best interest of the children [1000221840001].
The Court acknowledged that children of prostitutes should not be allowed to live in the undesirable and harmful environment of prostitute homes, especially to prevent abuse and exploitation as they grow older [1000221840002].
It was highlighted that legislation exists to control prostitution, but despite these efforts, the problem persists and has become more widespread, requiring serious and effective attention [1000221840003].
The Court decided to establish a committee to examine the issues comprehensively, including the relevant laws and social factors, and to submit a report with recommendations within eight weeks [1000221840004].
The committee was constituted with specific members, including advocates, social workers, and experts, to ensure a thorough review of the problem (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The Court directed the relevant government department to deposit a sum of Rs. 20,000 within two weeks to cover the expenses of the committee's work (!) .
The matter was scheduled for further hearing after the committee's report was received, with the next date set for a specific future date (!) .
Overall, the judgment underscores the need for social measures to protect children of prostitutes, balancing social integration with safeguards against exploitation and abuse, while avoiding unnecessary segregation [judgement_subject].
Please let me know if you'd like a more detailed elaboration or specific legal implications.
Judgment
This application under Art. 32 of the Constitution is at the instance of an advocate by way of a public interest litigation asking for direction to the respondents for making provision of separate schools with vocational training facilities and separate hostels for children of prostitutes. Notice was issued not only to the original respondents but at the instance of the Court also to all the States and the Union Territories. Many of them have responded and affidavits have been filed by way of return to the rule nisi.
2. Though Mr. Mahajan for the petitioner has pleaded that separate schools and hostels be raised for the children of the prostitutes, we are not inclined to accept the submission. Segregating prostitute children by locating separate schools and providing separate hostels, in our opinion, would not be in the interest of such children. It is said that prostitutes do not want to have children and ordinarily when children are born to them it is in spite of their desire not to rear children. But once such children are born to them, it is in the interest of such children and of society at large that the children of prostitutes should be segregated from their mothers a
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
