Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Gujarat High Court

Siddharajsinh Mahavirsinh Chudasma vs State Of Gujarat & 2....Opponent(S) on 13 October, 2014

         C/WPPIL/296/2014                                   JUDGMENT




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                     WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 296 of 2014



FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:



HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR
SAHAI


and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

================================================================

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see
      the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
      judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as
      to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any
      order made thereunder ?

5     Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?

================================================================
         SIDDHARAJSINH MAHAVIRSINH CHUDASMA....Applicant(s)
                             Versus
                STATE OF GUJARAT & 2....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR BHUNESH C RUPERA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. PARTH BHATT, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Opponent(s)
No. 1
================================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.


                                  Page 1 of 5
            C/WPPIL/296/2014                         JUDGMENT



                        VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
                        and
                        HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

                              Date : 13/10/2014


                              ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI)

1) We have heard Mr. Bhunesh C. Rupera, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2) In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

"(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to constitute a Children Welfare Committee State level and District-wise to redress the untold evils inflicted upon the children and further be pleased to direct to install/start/introduce a Free CHILDLINE emergency service for 24 hours a day in the name and style of "CHILDREN" for safety and protection of children from untold evils and ill-treatment meted out to children in the society in the entire State of Gujarat.

(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondents to give wide publicity about the existence of such free CHILDLINE emergency service in the entire State of Gujarat at all schools, hostels, public places such a bus stand, railway station, airport, etc., religious places such as temple, mosque, Gurudwara, Church, Agiyari etc. and all other educational institutions, villages, tribal areas and highways an other places, where public assemble in large numbers as well as in electronic media and print media.

C/WPPIL/296/2014 JUDGMENT (C ) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to constitute a child sexual harassment committee in each and every Taluka of the entire State of Gujarat.

(D) Pass such other and further orders as may be deemed just and fit."

3) There are various Acts looking after the welfare of the child viz. Protection of Children Act, 2005, Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2006, The Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986, The Children Act, 1960, Indian Child Welfare Act, 1978, The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, The Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 and Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

4) By way of this writ petition in the nature of public interest litigation, the petitioner wants that Child Welfare Committee at the State level and District level be constituted, Childline emergency service of 24 hours be started in all schools, hostels, public places such as bus stand, railway station, airport etc., and religious places like temple, mosque, Gurudwara, Church, Agiyari etc. and in all educational institutions, villages, tribal areas and highways and other places and for this purpose, an advertisement be issued and wide publicity be made in the electronic as well as in the print media. It is further prayed that this court may direct the respondents to constitute a child sexual harassment committee in each and every Taluka of the entire State of Gujarat.

C/WPPIL/296/2014 JUDGMENT

5) As we have stated earlier, there are various Acts which take care of child protection or child abuse as also sexual harassment of the child as well as exploitation by the employers. If any further enactment has to be made, it can be only made by the legislature. This court cannot direct the legislature to frame any particular law for a particular subject.

6) The Apex Court in the case of Supreme Court Employees Welfare Association v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 1990 SC 334 has held as under:

"There can be no doubt that no Court can direct a Legislature to enact a particular law. Similarly, when an executive authority exercises a legislative power by way of subordinate Legislation pursuant to the delegated authority of a Legislature, such 'executive authority cannot be asked to enact a law which he has been empowered to do under the delegated legislative authority."

7) The above decision of the Apex Court has been followed by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Lok Rakshak Seva Samiti v. Union of India & Anr., 2014(3) GLR 2018, wherein it has been held that High Court cannot direct the legislature to enact law.

8) The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Vishaka & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., (1997) 6 SCC 241 wherein various guidelines have been laid down by the Apex Court that where there is a sexual harassment of the women at workplaces, action should be taken under the guidelines and norms laid down by the Apex Court. This decision was rendered as there was no law for protection of women at work Page 4 of 5 C/WPPIL/296/2014 JUDGMENT places. However, the Acts which we have mentioned in the earlier part of the judgment clearly protect the child from sexual abuse or harassment. Therefore, the decision in the case of Vishaka & Ors. (supra) on which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, would not apply to the facts of the present case.

9) For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition, in the nature of public interest litigation, is dismissed.

(V.M.SAHAI, ACJ.) (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) Vahid Page 5 of 5