J UDGMENT

The petitioner is the mother of three minor girls aged 17, 13 and 11. Her husband, a police officer, committed suicide on 25.08.2022. Since then petitioner has been struggling to maintain the family and provide good education to her children. While so, on 25.06.2024, the Counsellor of the school in which the petitioner's daughters are studying informed the 3^rd respondent Station House Officer that the eldest girl told the Counsellor that, Ullas, with whom her mother is in a relationship, had molested her younger siblings. Thereupon, the 3^rd respondent deputed a Woman Police Constable to record the statements of the children. Accordingly, the statement of petitioner's 2^nd and 3^rd daughters was recorded on 26.06.2024 and the children were taken to the Taluk Hospital for medical examination. At the hospital, the children refused to undergo medical examination and was allowed to go home only by 10pm. Based on the statement of the children, two crimes were registered against the person named Ullas, alleging commission of offences under Section 354 IPC and Section 8 read with Section 7 and Section 10 read with Section 9(l),(p) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and the alleged perpetrator was remanded. Thereafter, on 09.08.2024, certain persons came to the petitioner's residence, claiming to be members of the Child Welfare Committee (CWC for short)/2^nd respondent and took the petitioner and her children to the office of the CWC. In spite of the petitioner stating that she had nothing to do with Ullas, the 2^nd respondent decided to send the two children aged 13 and 11 years to the Atma Gurukulam, Puranattukara, Thrissur (Children's home/SAA/Fit facility). As the petitioner refused to go back without her children, she was given interim custody based on an undertaking that the children would be produced as and when directed by the 2^nd respondent. The writ petition was moved at that point of time. By interim order dated 22.8.2024, the 2^nd respondent was directed not to compel the petitioner and her children to appear before the Committee till the next posting date.

2. Heard Adv.Rajit for the petitioner and Senior Government Pleader Deepa Narayanan for the respondents. I also interacted with the three children and the petitioner.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that, for the CWC to invoke its authority, the child brought before it should be a 'child in need of care and protection'. In the petitioner's case, the direction to place the children in a home was issued even without deciding whether the children were in 'need of care and protection'. It is contended that unless the procedure prescribed in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (the Act for short) and the Model Rules are scrupulously followed, it may result in children being plucked away from the custody of their parents, as in the petitioner's case.

4. Learned Government Pleader submitted that an intimation was given to the CWC from the Police station after registration of the crime against Ullas. The crime itself was registered based on the statement of the children that the petitioner was having an affair with Ullas and that person, while staying in the same house, had sexually harassed them. In such circumstances, the CWC was justified in taking immediate action, based on the information received. The CWC is conferred with enough power to take swift action to save the children from the clutches of the perpetrator or the abusive parent. Therefore, the contention that the procedure prescribed under the Act and Rules were not strictly complied with is liable to be rejected.

5. Before proceeding to decide the correctness of the procedure adopted by the Child Welfare Committee, this Court deems it appropriate to highlight three of the general principles to be followed in the administration of the Act. The said principles contained in Section 3 are extracted below;

Section 3:- General Principles to be followed in