SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Mad) 1612

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. CHANDRU
R. Suseela
Versus
The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu & Others
W.P.Nos. 36778 of 2005 and 4952 and 23407 of 2007 and W.P.M.P. No. 39389 of 2005 in W.P. No. 36778 of 2005 and M.P. No. 1 of 2007 in W.P. No. 4952 of 2007
Decided On : 10-06-2008

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:D. Geetha, Sudha Ramalingam, Advocates.
For the Respondents: M. Dhandapani, Spl. GP.

The main legal point established is the need for proper Rules under the Juvenile Justice Act to address issues related to the protection and care of children in conflict with the law and in need of care and protection.

Headnote:

Juvenile Justice - Child Welfare Committee - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000 - Rules framed under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000, Code of Criminal Procedure, Supreme Court guidelines in Delhi Domestic Working Womens Forum – Vs – Union of India and others [1995 (1) SCC 14]

Fact of the Case:

The writ petitions involved seeking direction for legal action against perpetrators of violence against children, assistance of an Advocate to children before the Child Welfare Committee, and proper Rules under the Juvenile Justice Act. The Court formed a Committee to finalize draft Rules and directed the State to reconvene the committee and revise the draft Rules in accordance with law.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found the need for proper Rules under the Juvenile Justice Act and directed the State to reconvene the committee and revise the draft Rules in accordance with law.

Issues: The issues involved the lack of proper Rules under the Juvenile Justice Act, the need for legal action against perpetrators of violence against children, and the assistance of an Advocate to children before the Child Welfare Committee.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the need for proper Rules under the Juvenile Justice Act and directed the State to reconvene the committee and revise the draft Rules in accordance with law.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs. The State was directed to reconvene the committee and revise the draft Rules in accordance with law.

Judgment :-

K. Chandru, J.

Heard the arguments of Mrs. D. Geetha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M. Dhandapani, learned Special Government Pleader representing the respondents and perused the records.

2. In W.P. No. 36778 of 2005, the writ petition is filed by one Advocate seeking for a direction to the Child Welfare Committee at Chennai to initiate legal action under the Code of Criminal Procedure against the perpetrators of violence against those children who are produced before the Child Welfare Committee and also to provide assistance of an Advocate to the children who are produced before the Child Welfare Committee in Tamil Nadu.

3. In her affidavit, she had stated that a 13 years old girl, by name, Priyanka was sexually abused by her father for over 7 years. The girls father also took her to an Internet Cafe to watch pornographic pictures. This made her to run away from the house and she was rescued by the Child Welfare Committee at Erode and committed to appear before the Chennai Committee. A complaint was given to the third respondent. As no action was taken, the issue was represented before the Committee comprising of three members. When they made a representation on behalf of the child, it was stated that the Committee can permit representation by legal counsel only to prisoners and not to children in need of care and protection and it does not encourage the lawyers meeting the children kept under their custody. It was also stated that similar experience was gained before several other Child Welfare Committees in Tamil Nadu. Therefore, after referring to the Rules framed under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000, the petitioner found that the said Rules were lacking to cover the areas and are not in tune with the requirements mandated by the Act. Therefore, she prayed that the Rules must be made in tune with the provisions of the Cr.P.C. and the Rules must provide for the following:-

1. To register a complaint as and when cases of child abuse is reported before the Child Welfare Committee

2. To provide the assistance of a lawyer and a social worker to the victim of child abuse as per the the guidelines of the Supreme Court in Delhi Domestic Working Womens Forum – Vs – Union of India and others [1995 (1) SCC 14]

3. To permit the lawyers to have interviews with the children coming under the purview of Juvenile Justice System whether as children in need of care and protection or children in conflict with law.

4. This Court, by an order dated 111. 2005, directed an Advocate of this Court to interview the victim girl Priyanka and also to make a report to this Court. Subsequently, by an order dated 211. 2005, this Court formed a Committee and paragraph 5 of the said order may be reproduced:-

"By consent of the parties, we constitute a Committee consisting of the Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Director, Social Defence, Mrs. Andal Damodaran, General Secretary, Indian Council for Child Welfare, Mr. R. Muthukumaraswamy, Additional Advocate General, Smt. Geetha Ramaseshan, Advocate, and Mrs. D. Geetha, Advocate. The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, shall be the convener of the Committee. The Committee shall submit a representation to this Court within a period of eight weeks."

5. Pursuant to the direction, a meeting was held on 012. 2005. Thereafter, two consultative meetings were held on 112. 2005 and 212. 2005 with experts in the field. Finally, on 01.02.2006, the Committee met and finalised the draft Rules and the same was circulated to this Court along with the report of the Committee. Copies of the draft rules were furnished to counsel for both sides.

6. Even when this proceedings are pending, another Advocate by name, S. Anbazhagan filed a writ petition being W.P. No. 23407 of 2007 stating that four juveniles, who were arrested in Crime No. 3304 of 2007 on 26. 2007, were remanded to judicial custody and to be kept in Central Prison, Ti




































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top