Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Bachpan Bachao Andolan vs Union Of India And Ors. on 5 September, 2017
Bench: Madan B. Lokur, Deepak Gupta
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.4 SECTION PIL-W
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 75/2012
BACHPAN BACHAO ANDOLAN Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. & ORS. Respondent(s)
Date : 05-09-2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
For Petitioner(s) Mr. H.S. Phoolka, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, AOR
Mr. Bhuwan Ribhu, Adv.
Mr. Saksham Maheshwari, Adv.
Mr. Shree Pal Singh, AOR
For Respondent(s)
Union of India Mr. Maninder Singh, ASG
Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Adv.
Ms. Sunita Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Gunwant Dara, Adv.
Ms. Rashmi Malhotra, Adv.
Mr. Prabhas Bajaj, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur, Adv.
Mr. G.S. Makker, Adv.
Mr. T.A. Khan, Adv.
Mr. B.V. Balramdas, Adv.
Mr. B.K. Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur, Adv.
NHRC Ms. Shobha, AOR
Ms. Joyshree Barman, Adv.
NALSA Ms. Anitha Shenoy, AOR
Ms. Srishti Agnihotri, Adv.
Mr. Annam D. N. Rao, AOR
For States of
Andhra Pradesh
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, AOR
Digitally signed by
MEENAKSHI KOHLI
Date: 2017.09.06
Ms. Prerna Singh, Adv.
11:22:14 IST
Reason:
Arunachal Pradesh Mr. Anil Shrivastav, AOR
1
Ms. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Assam Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Adv.
Mr. Sayooj Mohandas, Adv.
M/s Corporate Law Group
Bihar Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.
Chhattisgarh Mr. Aniruddh P. Mayee, Adv.
Mr. Avnish M. Oza, Adv.
Mr. Chirag Jain, Adv.
Gujarat Ms. Hemantika Wahi, AOR
Ms. Puja Singh, Adv.
Ms. Jesal Wahi, Adv.
Ms. Shodhika Sharma, Adv.
Haryana Mr. Viswa Pal Singh, AOR.
H.P. Mr. D.K. Thakur, AAG
Mr. Shariq Ahmed, Adv.
Jharkhand Mr. Anil Kr. Jha, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Tyagi, Adv.
Mr. Krishnanand Pandey, Adv.
J&K Mr. G.M. Kawoosa, Adv.
Palak Mittal, Adv.
Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, Adv.
Karnataka Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR
Mr. Lagnesh Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Parikshit P. Angadi, Adv.
Kerala Mr. G. Prakash, Adv.
Mr. Jishnu M.L., Adv.
Mrs. Priyanka Prakash, Adv.
Mrs. Beena Prakash, Adv.
Mr. Vijay Shankar V.L., Adv.
Maharashtra Mr. Kunal A. Cheema, Adv.
Mr. Yogesh Ahirrao, Adv.
Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar, AOR.
M.P. Mr. C.D. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Rusia, Adv.
Manipur Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, AOR
2
Meghalaya Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, AOR
Mizoram Mr. T. G. Narayanan Nair, AOR
Nagaland Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv.
Mr. Edward Belho, Adv.
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. K. Luikang Michael, Adv.
Mr. Z.H. Isaac Haiding, Adv.
Odisha Mr. Shibashish Misra, AOR
Mr. Sylona Mohapatra, Adv.
Punjab Mr. Karan Bharihoke, Adv.
Rajasthan Mr. S.S. Shamshery, Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Singh, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Raj, Adv.
Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv.
Sikkim Ms. Aruna Mathur, Adv.
Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Adv.
Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Adv.
Mr. Amit Arora, Adv.
for M/s Arputham Aruna & Co.
Tamil Nadu Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR
Ms. Mahalakshmi, Adv.
Ms. Sujatha Bagadhi, Adv.
Tripura Mr. Gopal Singh, AOR
Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Adv.
Telangana Mr. S. Udaya Kumar Sagar, Adv.
Mr. Mrityunjai Singh, Adv.
Uttar Pradesh Mr. D.K. Singh, AAG
Mr. Adarsh Upadhyay, Adv.
Ms. Komal Mundhra, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Agrawal, Adv.
Uttarakhand Ms. Rachana Srivastava, AOR
Mr. A.K. Sharma, Adv.
West Bengal Mr. Raja Chatterjee, Adv.
Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, AOR.
Mr. Runa Bhuyan, Adv.
Mr. Piyush Sachdev, Adv.
A&N Islands Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Adv.
3
Mrs. G. Indira, AOR
Chandigarh Mr. Chandra Prakash, AOR.
Puducherry Mr. V.G. Pragasam, AOR
Mr. S. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Adv.
Mr. Menu Sundaram, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR
Mr. D. Mahesh Babu, AOR
Mr. V.K. Goel, Adv.
Mr. Hitesh Kr. Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Sudha Gupta, Adv.
Mr. G. N. Reddy, AOR
Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, AOR
Mr. Subhashini, Adv.
Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR
Mr. Irshad Ahmad, AOR
Mr. Krishnanand Pandeya, AOR
Ms. Shalini Chandra, AOR
Mr. Sunil Fernandes, AOR
Mr. Avijit Bhattacharjee, AOR
M/s. Venkat Palwai Law Associates
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Standard Operating Procedure on Missing Children which has been issued by the Ministry of Women and Child Development in the Government of India needs to be monitored so that effective steps are taken to trace out missing children and restore them to their families. It is suggested that the monitoring may be done by the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights (SCPCR). Learned 4 ASG has no objection to this.
In our opinion, this suggestion is acceptable. Accordingly, we direct the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India to inform all the State Commissions to monitor the Standard Operating Procedure on Missing Children. There is no doubt that rescue of missing children and their restoration are of considerable importance and we expect the State Commissions to take up the task in right earnestness.
It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) does not contain any data of missing children. Since the NCRB is not a party in this petition, we are not inclined to issue any direction to the NCRB to publish the data on missing children. However, we request the NCRB to look into this aspect and include it in the data that is published annually by the NCRB.
It is finally submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the event of a disaster, the persons who suffer the most are children. It is submitted that directions be issued to the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to concentrate on the rescue and rehabilitation of children in the event of a disaster. Again, since the NDMA is not a party in these proceedings, we can only request the NDMA to look into this matter since it does appear that the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner are correct. The NDMA should give special attention to the children in the event of a disaster since they are the most vulnerable victims of a disaster that may strike at any time.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that one 5 I.T. professional – Mr. Vijay Gnanadesikan has developed a mobile application on facial recognition of missing children. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the petitioner will be in touch with Mr. Vijay Gnanadesikan and take his assistance so that the Government of India is able to make use of his expertise in developing and implementing a mobile application on facial recognition of missing children.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the cases of trafficking of children and children illegally being compelled to be involved in child labour are not registered by the police. No details have been furnished in this regard. However, we issue a general direction that in the event of any information about trafficking of children or exploitation of children contrary to law appropriate cases should be registered by the police and necessary follow up action be taken.
List the matter on 07.12.2017 for the limited purpose of facial recognition issues.
(MEENAKSHI KOHLI) (MADHU NARULA)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER
6