IMPORTANT POINTS
If any member of a CWC can be compelled or pressurized to give such a certificate then that member has no business of ever being appointed as member of CWC or in any capacity in a child rights institution.
NCPCR taking media in the Children’s Home is bad.
Commissions under the CPCR Act have no jurisdiction to monitor criminal cases.
Commission’s communication should be like a request and not an order. Threatening an official with arrest should be the last resort.
Every official is duty bound to reply to the Commissions. Officials are not entitled to question jurisdiction of the Commissions.
There is no question of ouster of jurisdiction of any Commission.

JUDGMENT

Deepak Gupta, J.

1. It’s so sad! We start with a lament because institutions set up to protect children have virtually forsaken them in a fight over their so called jurisdictions.

2. India is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989 which makes it obligatory upon the signatory States to take all necessary steps to protect the rights of the children as set out in the Convention. The Government of India enacted the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. This was repealed by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the JJ Act’).

3. It was felt expedient to enact a law constituting special commissions to protect the rights of children. Parliament enacted the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CPCR Act’). The CPCR Act envisages the constitution of a National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (hereinafter referred to as ‘NCPCR/National Commission’) under Section 3 and the State Commissions for Protection of Child Rights (hereinafter referred to as ‘State Commissions’) under Section 17. We shall deal with their respective functions and powers at a later stage but there can be no manner of doubt that these two Commissions – one at the National level and the other at the State level – are expected to function in a spirit of cooperation. We expect such Commissions to consult, discuss and cooperate with each other while exercising their powers and fulfilling the duties enjoined upon them by the CPCR Act. These two institutions are in the nature of siblings. The goal which they both set out to achieve is the same, viz., protecting children from all sorts of abuse, exploitation etc. We see no reason why there should be any disharmony and lack of coordination between these two institutions. This non­cooperation and lack of coordination can only occur when the persons manning the institutions put their own interests over the interest of the children. It is only when those in­charge of such commissions give themselves so much importance that they forget that they are the creation of statute, the only purpose of which is to protect children.

4. This case is a classic example where in the fight between the State Commission and the National Commission the children have been, all but forgotten. We are sorry that this Court has to spend its time resolving such disputes. This Court as well as the two major parties litigating before us definitely have better things to do.

5. From the material on record, it appears that news reports were published some time in February, 2017 indicating that a child­care institution based in Jalpaiguri in West Bengal had indulged in large scale trafficking of children. The NCPCR took cognizance of these reports on 03.03.2017 and two members of the NCPCR went to Jalpaiguri on 07.03.2017. They requested the State officials to provide them some information which, according to the NCPCR, was not provided. They finally summoned the Additional Director General of Police (ADGP), Criminal Investigation Department (CID), West Bengal (Respondent no.1 herein) to appear before the NCPCR. This gentleman, instead of appearing before the NCPCR, chose to file a writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of the NCPCR to summon him. The High Court, by the impugned order dated 29.08.2017, stayed the direction of the NCPCR mainly on the ground that since the State Commission had taken cognizance of the matter on 24.02.2017, the NCPCR had prima facie no jurisdiction.

6. Section 13 of the CPCR Act deals with the functions and powers of the National Commission. Section 24 of the CPCR Act vests the same functions and powers in the State Commissions. Section 13 of the CPCR Act therefore defines the functions and powers of both the NCPCR and the State Commissions. It reads as follows :­

“13. Functions of Commission.­ (1) The Commission shall perform all or any of the follo