IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
JYOTSNA SHARMA, J.
Soni Saxena @ Neetu Saxena – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Criminal Revision No. 6033 of 2023
Decided On : 31-01-2024
Juvenile Justice Act - Child Welfare Committee - Section 27, Section 101 - The court discussed the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, particularly Section 27 and Section 101, and highlighted the powers and responsibilities of the Child Welfare Committee in determining the care and protection of children. The court emphasized that appeals against orders of the Committee should be made to the Children's Court, except in cases related to foster care and sponsorship after care, where the appeal shall lie with the District Magistrate.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute regarding the custody of a victim girl who was the subject of a criminal case. The Child Welfare Committee had refused to release the victim girl into the care and custody of her mother, leading to an appeal and subsequent challenge of the appellate court's jurisdiction.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellate court had erred in declining to exercise its powers based on wrong assumptions regarding its jurisdiction to hear the challenge to the order passed by the Child Welfare Committee. The court set aside the appellate court's order and remanded the matter for a fresh decision.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the jurisdiction of the appellate court to hear the challenge to the Child Welfare Committee's order and the proper interpretation of the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act regarding appeals against the Committee's orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the Juvenile Justice Act, particularly Section 27 and Section 101, which outlined the powers and appeal procedures related to the Child Welfare Committee's orders. The court emphasized that the appellate court had jurisdiction to hear the challenge to the Committee's order, except in cases related to foster care and sponsorship after care.
Final Decision: The revision was finally disposed of with a direction to the appellate court to adjudicate the matter of custody of the victim according to law, and the order passed by the appellate court was set aside. The appellate court was expected to decide the appeal expeditiously.
JUDGMENT :
JYOTSNA SHARMA, J.
1. Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Vikesh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2-the first informant and learned AGA for the State.
2. This criminal revision has been filed challenging the order dated 20.07.2023 and 23.08.2023 passed by the Child Welfare Committee, Shahjahanpur in relation to a matter arising out of case crime no. 01 of 2023 under sections 342, 376(3), 506 IPC and section 5(dha)/6 POCSO Act, by which firstly she was put in a government protection home under section 37(c) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 by Child Welfare Committee vide order dated 20.07.2023 and further an application moved by her mother for taking her into her custody, was rejected by order passed by the Child Welfare Committee on 23.08.2023. By means of a supplementary affidavit filed by the revisionist an order passed by the appellate court on 31.10.2023 in an appeal preferred against the order dated 23.08.2023 whereby the appeal was dismissed on the ground that the children court had no jurisdiction to hear the same, has also been challenged in this criminal revision.
3. Relevant facts are as below:
4. The appellate court seems to have passed the order in the light of the provisions of section 27(10) of the J.J. Act, 2015. Section 27 deals with the Constitution of the Child Welfare Committee, the qualifications of a person as regard eligibility of the person to be appointed as a member of a Committee, disqualifications, the tenure of the members, the procedure for inquiry as regard termination of the members etc. Section 27(10) of t
The main legal point established in the judgment is the proper interpretation of the appeal procedures under the Juvenile Justice Act, specifically highlighting the jurisdiction of the appellate cour....
The main legal point established is the temporary nature of detention in a protection home for a child in need of care and protection under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, and the wide powers of the ....
The existence of a statutory appeal under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 precludes the use of inherent powers under the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023.
The role of the Committee commences from the stage where both parents are not in a position to take care and protect the child. The parens patriae principle to intervene is to protect the child and a....
The court held that a Magistrate cannot review or recall an order once signed, as it violates established judicial procedures and principles of natural justice.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.