Bachpan Bachao Andolan vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 1644

INDIRA BANERJEE, M. M. SUNDRESH
Bachpan Bachao Andolan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. H.S. Phoolka, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Advocate, Ms. Rachan Tyagi, Advocate, Mr. Saksham Maheshwari, Advocate, Ms. Bindita Chaturvedi, Advocate, For the Appellant / Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, LD. ASG, Ms. Garima Prashad, Sr. Advocate, (AAG, ), Mr. Rohit K. Singh, Advocate, Mr. Pritam Bishwas, Advocate, Mr. Kislay Jha, Advocate, Ms. Ruchi Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Samarth Srivastava, Advocate, Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Advocate, Ms. Vanshaja Shukla, Advocate, Mr. Debojit Borkakati, Advocate, Mr. Pradeep Misra, Advocate, Mr. Abhimanyu Tewari, Advocate, Ms. Eliza Bar, Advocate, Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Karun Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Anupam Ngangom, Advocate, Mr. Wahengbam Immanuel Meitei, Advocate, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG, Ms. Neela Kedar Gokhale, Advocate, Ms. Praveena Gautam, Advocate, Ms. Shagun Thakur, Advocate, Ms. Poornima Singh, Advocate, Mr. Sourav Singh, Advocate, Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, Advocate, Ms. Anu K. Joy, Advocate, Mr. Alim Anvar, Advocate, Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Advocate, Ms. Sweena Nair, Advocate, Mr. P. Mohith Rao, Advocate, Mr. Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, Advocate, Mr. Polanki Gowtham, Advocate, Mr. Shaik Mohamad Haneef, Advocate, Mr. T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Advocate, Ms. Rajeswari Mukherjee, Advocate, Mr. K.V. Girish Chowdhary, Advocate, Mr. Sameer Abhyankar, Advocate, Ms. Yeshi Rinchhen, Advocate, Ms. Vani Vandana Chhetri, Advocate, Mr. Abhinav Mishra, Advocate, Ms. Nishi Sangtani, Advocate, Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., Advocate, Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, Advocate, Dr. Manish Singhvi, Senior Advocate, Mr. Arpit Parkash Advocate, Mr. Vikalp Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Sandeep Kumar Jha, Advocate, Mr. Ajay Pal, Advocate, Mr. Abhinav Mukerji, Advocate, Ms. Nupur Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Shobhit Dwivedi, Advocate, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mahara, Advocate, Ms. Neela kedar Gokhle, Advocate, Ms. Praveena Gautam, Advocate, Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Advocate, Mr. akshay Shrivastava, Advocate, Ms. Bihu Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Pratishtha Vij, Advocate, Mr. Avijit Mani Tripathi, Advocate, Mr. Upendra Mishra, Advocate, Mr. T.K. Nayak, Advocate, Mr. Marbiang Khongwir, Advocate, Mr. Kynpham V. Kharlyngdoh, Advocate, Mr. Siddhesh Kotwal, Advocate, Ms. Ana Upadhyay, Advocate, Ms. Manya Hasija, Advocate, Mr. Akash Singh, Advocate, Mr. Nihar Dharmadhikari, Advocate, Mr. Nirnimesh Dube, Advocate, Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Advocate, Ms. Limayinla Jamir, Advocate, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate, Ms. Chubalemla Chang, Advocate, Mr. Prang Newmai, Advocate, Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Advocate, Mr. Vishal Banshal, Advocate, Ms. Rajeshwari Shankar, Advocate, Mr. Niroop Sukrithy, Advocate, Mr. Ovais Mohd., Advocate, Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh, Advocate, Ms. Pallavi Langar, Advocate, Dr. Monika Gusain, Advocate, For the Respondent.

ORDER

1. We have perused the report submitted by the Principal District Judge, Khandwa. On going through the report, we find that the girl is being educated at a school, where she is happily inter-mingling with other students, attentive in class, taking interest in pursuing her studies and moving on in life. She told the Lady Magistrate who visited her that she wanted to become a teacher in future. She had no complaints. No further action need be taken so far as the girl is concerned.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NALSA submits that the scheme for empanelment of para legal volunteers in Police Stations for missing children, framed by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority has been circulated to all the State Legal Services Authorities and also to the Legal Services Authorities of the Union Territories, as a model, so that appropriate schemes might be framed for appointment of para legal volunteers in police stations in respect of for missing children and other offences against children in the States and Union Territories using the Delhi scheme as a model scheme with appropriate modifications.

3. We direct the respective State Legal Services Authorities/Legal Services

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(SC) 1644

INDIRA BANERJEE, M. M. SUNDRESHBachpan Bachao Andolan – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

INDIRA BANERJEE, M. M. SUNDRESH
Bachpan Bachao Andolan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent