Back
2007 Supreme(Del) 1721
High Court Of Delhi
MUKUL MUDGAL,REVA KHETRAPAL
REVA KHETRAPAL - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
CRL. A 927 Of 2002
Decided On : 08/24/2007
The central legal point established in the judgment is the duty of the State to protect children's rights as mandated by Article 21 and Article 39 of the Constitution of India, as well as the CRC 1989.
Headnote:
Children's Rights - Duty of State to Protect - Article 21, Article 39 - CRC 1989 - Preamble, Article 2.2, Article 8.1, Article 12.1, Article 12.2, Article 39 - Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the plight of three children whose father was convicted for murdering their mother. The children were left destitute and orphaned, prompting the court to seek financial support for them.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the children were victims of a system that did not provide relief to innocent victims of a crime and its aftermath. It emphasized the duty of the court to ensure the mandate of articles 21 and 39 is given effect to, and sought financial support for the children.
Issues: Plight of the children, Duty of the State to protect children's rights, Financial support for the children
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the duty of the State to protect children's rights as mandated by Article 21 and Article 39 of the Constitution of India, as well as the CRC 1989. It also highlighted the obligation to consider international conventions and norms for construing domestic law.
Final Decision: The court issued notices to the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Ministry of Women and Child Development, Chief Secretary of National Capital Territory of Delhi, and others to consider framing a scheme and provision of appropriate funds for the children's support. It also requested the Attorney General of India to appear in the case and directed educational institutions to extend support to the children.
( 1 ) THIS order is a sequel to the orders passed 23rd November, 2006 by this Court in the following terms:
"after arguments were concluded, learned counsel for the appellant stated that he has instructions from the appellant to the effect that the appellant is ready to give his entire movable and immovable property to his three children so that they can be looked after. "
( 2 ) THEREAFTER the appeal filed by the appellant in this Court was dismissed and his conviction for the murder of his wife Meenakshi under Section 302 IPC was upheld and the appellant's sentence for life awarded by the learned sessions Judge on 27th March 2002 was confirmed. Subsequent thereto, on 16th january 2007, the following order was passed:
"we have heard the convict and also perused the report given by Mr. Dharmesh Sharma, Secretary, Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. The present situation is that Ms. Renu is living with her maternal grandfather while surender and Amar Sharma are living in 'arya Orphanage', Pataudi House, daryaganj. We have enquired from Surender and Amar Sharma regarding their well being. They appear to be reasonably satisfied with the arrangements at the orphanage. Renu Sharma is also studying in B. A. 1st year in Kalindi College.
( 3 ) THEREAFTER, an account was opened in the name of Renu Sharma daughter of the appellant. On 25th April 2007 this Court concluded as follows: a report has been made on behalf of Delhi High Court Legal Service committee by Mr. Sharma which states that it may not be feasible and desirable to let out the shop and the residence in view of the complications which may arise owing to stay of a tenant. In the report it is also stated that it is better if the premises are retained for the use of the children who may like to stay together in the premises of the father. The report taken on record. "
( 4 ) ON 27th July 2007, the following order was passed:
"mr. Ashutosh Sharma, maternal grand father of the three children of the appellant is present and he states that he will be accommodating the two sons after their studies are over as both are studying in class 10th and Class 11th. He seeks time to ascertain the views of the children. He has been informed that it may be possible to handover a monthly payment to the children for pursuing studies. "
( 5 ) THEREAFTER since a philanthropic and generous citizen of this country mr. Vinod Dhawan on a suggestion made by this Court readily agreed to bear the expenses of the two children, the following order was passed on 13th August 2007:
"the maternal grand father of the appellant's children is present in Court today. He has handed over a letter of the children which shows that the Renu sharma, the daughter and Surender and Amar, the two sons of the appellant are willing to accept the sum of Rs. 2,000/- per month offered by Shri Vinod Dhawan. A separate order is being passed giving reasons. The letter be taken on record. We appreciate the role played by both the counsel and the Delhi High Court Legal Services Authority. The matter is part heard. List on 12th November, 2007. "
( 6 ) THIS case discloses the plight of the three children in a present case where their father was convicted for murdering his wife, the mother of the 3 children. The children are now left destitute and virtually orphaned and thus are the victims not only of the crime, but also the punishment for the crime. The children are therefore victims of a system which does not provide any apparent relief to such unfortunate and totally innocent victims of a crime and its aftermath. The two sons who were examined in the Court expressed their agony to this Court and stated that the minute they reach the age of majority, they would be asked to leave the orphanage. In a situation where both the children are nearing the age of 18 years soon, we are of the view that it is necessary to secure some kind of financial support to such victims of crime. This has been necessitated by the fact t
