@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
1. We have heard very lengthy submissions from the Amicus Curie Ms. Aparna Bhat, Ms. Indira Jaising, ASG, Mr. Paras Kuhad, ASG.
2. It has been brought to our notice that inspite of the emphatic directions that have been issued by this Court on 3rd January, 2013 directing all the
States and the Union Territories to implement the protective provisions contained in the Protection of Rights of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012, the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, many
States and Union Territories have not complied with the same. By order dated 3rd January, 2013, we had also directed the States to file an
affidavit indicating the time frame within which the State Commission for the protection of children would be established. By a subsequent order
dated 7th February, 2013, further directions were issued to all the States and the Union Territories to comply with the obligations under the
aforesaid three Acts, with regard to the establishment of protection institutions/implementation institutions, together with necessary Rules and
Regulations. The aforesaid order was to be complied with within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the
order. Sadly, we have to notice that inspite of the concern shown not only by this Court but also by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties,
little or no progress has been made in this regard. Although the affidavits have been filed indicating that the State Commissions have been
established yet we find that such establishment is only on paper. In many States, Chairman of the Commission has not been appointed and in some
other States even Members have not been appointed. This apart, necessary rules and Regulations have also not been framed. This, in our opinion,
would be sufficient justification for this Court to take a serious view and initiate appropriate proceedings for contempt of court against the
defaulting States and the Union Territories.
3. Given the lackadaisical manner in which the States and the Union Territories have responded to the concern shown by this Court in relation to
the wholly unacceptable situation prevailing and to stamp out any further exploitation of children, it has become necessary to re-emphasize that it is
the bounden duty of the States under Articles 21, 21A, 23, 24, 45 and 51A(k) to create and maintain a protective and healthy environment in
which children who are the future of this country can bloom and subsequently become mature and responsible citizen of this country. We have
been pained to notice the utterly callous attitude adopted by the States as well as the Union Territories. We, therefore, have no option at this stage
but to issue some further mandatory directions to ensure that the exploitation of the children in all spheres of life is brought to an end with utmost
expedition.
4. We may notice at this stage that pursuant to our earlier directions Tripura, Dadar and Nagar Haveli, Lakshadweep, Chandigarh, Andaman and
Nicobar, Pondicherry and Daman and Diu have still not constituted State Commissions u/s 17 of the Commission for Protection of Child Rights
Act, 2005. Some of the States which have established the State Commissions for the protection of children but have not completely constituted the
same by either not appointing a Chairperson or Members are as under:
Andhra Pradesh: The Commission exists only on paper as no Chairman/Member has been appointed.
Chhattisgarh is partially constituted as only Chairman has been appointed and the members have not been appointed.
Gujarat: Although Chairman has been appointed yet no member or Secretary of the Commission has been appointed.
Haryana: The situation is exactly the same as Gujarat, i.e. neither any Member nor Secretary has been appointed although the Chairman has been
selected and appointed.
Himachal Pradesh: Only a Member Secretary has been appointed. No Chairperson or Member has been appointed.
Kerala-Again only a Secretary has been appointed but there is no Chairperson or Member appointed.
Tamil Nadu has appointed a Chairperson but no Member has been appointed.
Nagaland-Nothing has been done, i.e. no Chairperson or Member has been appointed.
Similarly in U.P., nothing has been done as neither the Chairperson nor any Member has been appointed.
5. This inaction of the States is in the teeth of the directions issued by this Court on 3rd January, 2013 and 7th February, 2013. We make it clear
that this Court had taken notice of the exploitation of children and the deplorable conditions of children in various orphanages on the basis of the
letter received, way back in the year 2007. Surely, the States and the Union Territories must realize that they have to operate under the
Constitution and have to be duty bound to act in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. Furthermore, each and every field which
concerns the welfare and the protection of the children is covered by relevant legislation. The three prominent Acts have already been listed
hereinabove.
6. Keeping in view the aforesaid attitude of the States and the Union Territories, we direct that the Chief Secretaries of all the States to which
notices have been issued in this matter shall file an affidavit within a period of eight weeks from the date of this order disclosing full details with
regard to the implementation of the obligations specified under the three Acts. The affidavit shall contain all the relevant information with regard to
the following:
a. Whether the State Commissions have been set up u/s 17 of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005?
b. Whether the appointment of the Chairperson and six Members has been made indicating the names of such Chairpersons and members?
c. Whether Rules have been framed by the State Governments under the said Act?
d. Whether the said Commissions are functional and if not what are the constraints. The appointment and the remuneration structure of the
Chairperson, Members and supports staff including Member Secretary of the State Commissions?
e. The Chief Secretaries of the States in their affidavits to also indicate whether Special Courts have been designated u/s 28 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012?
f. Whether Special Public Prosecutors have been appointed u/s 32 of the said Act?
g. Whether Rules have been framed under the Right to Education Act, 2009?
h. Whether all Institutions run by the State Governments or by Voluntary Organisations for Children in need care and protection have been
registered under the provisions of Section 34 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, read with Rule 71 of the said
Act?
i. Whether any unregistered institutions for children in need of care and protection are being run and if so have they been shut down or taken over
by the State Governments?
7. It is further directed that in the unlikely event of there being a non-compliance of any part of the directions issued by this Court, an officer of the
rank of Principal Secretary of State Government shall remain present in person in the Court to clarify the issues with respect to the failure to
implement the directions of the Court. If for any reason, the affidavit, as directed for, is not filed by the Chief Secretary before the next date of
hearing, then also, the officer of the rank referred above shall remain present in person to explain the reasons for the State''s failure to submit the
affidavit.
8. The concerned State Governments shall also submit the required information in the format annexed hereto as part of the affidavit to be filed by
them.
ANNEXURE
THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012
THE RIGHT OF CHILDREN TO FREE & COMPULSORY EDUCATION ACT, 2009
THE JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT, 2000
THE COMMISSION FOR PROTECTION OF CHILD RIGHTS ACT, 2005