Case Title: Re: Exploitation of Children in Orphanages in State of Tamil Nadu V. Union of India
The UP State Commission for Protection of Child Rights and the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights had received notifications from the Supreme Court objecting to how the relevant state agencies were handling youngsters who are in trouble with the law.
The order, which draws attention to the illegal actions of the UP and Delhi police who were alleged to have detained and tortured minors in police stations, was issued in response to a miscellaneous application filed by Amicus Curiae Aparna Bhat.
Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Aniruddha Bose's division bench instructed both state Commissions to file their replies within three weeks after hearing the petitioner's arguments. They also instructed the Union of India and the National Commission for the Protection of Children's Rights to investigate the situation and submit reports within three weeks.
Bhat had petitioned the Supreme Court with the claim that, in spite of the court's specific orders dated December 5, 2018, numerous childcare facilities across the nation still treat children inhumanely, sometimes to the point of abuse.
The Supreme Court ruled that Section 10 of the JJ Act requires that a child in trouble with the law be put solely under the care of the designated child welfare officer or the special juvenile police unit, and not in the custody of the normal police. Additionally, Section 12 states that in cases involving minors, bail is the rule.
"Sub-section (1) [Section 12 of JJ Act] makes it absolutely clear that a child alleged to be in conflict with law should be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person. The only embargo created is that in case the release of the child is likely to bring him into association with known criminals or expose the child to moral, physical or psychological danger or where the release of the child would defeat the ends of justice, then bail can be denied for reasons to be recorded in writing. Even if bail is not granted, the child cannot be kept in jail or police lockup and has to be kept in an observation home or place of safety."
The court overruled this and said that the JJ Boards are responsible for making sure that children who are in legal trouble are not harmed.
"All JJBs in the country must follow the letter and spirit of the provisions of the Act. We make it clear that the JJBs are not meant to be silent spectators and pass orders only when a matter comes before them. They can take note of the factual situation if it comes to the knowledge of the JJBs that a child has been detained in prison or police lock-up. It is the duty of the JJBs to ensure that the child is immediately granted bail or sent to an observation home or a place of safety. The Act cannot be flouted by anybody, least of all the police," the bench observed.
In addition, Bhat claimed that despite more than 14 months having elapsed since the directives, the government had not provided her with a copy of the report on children housed in childcare institutions and the steps taken to assure their security.
In light of this, the court had ordered the Union of India and the NCPCR to submit any reports on the appropriate steps taken by them.