Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

22. Read in this light, the definition of a child in need of care and protection given in Section 2(14) of the JJ Act should be given a broad and purposeful interpretation – it ought not to be treated as exhaustive but illustrative and furthering the requirements of social justice. This understanding would also be in consonance with Article 40 of the CRC which stipulates that the “State Parties shall recognize rights of every child accused of an offence and treatment of such a child shall be in a manner consistent with promotion of the child’s dignity and worth”.

De-institutionalization

49. In the context of rehabilitation and social re-integration, it was submitted before us that institutionalization of children is not necessarily the only available option. This submission of the learned Amicus also finds support in Article 20 of the CRC. The Article obligates the State Parties to provide special protection and assistance to children temporarily or permanently deprived of family environment. The Article illustrates alternate care in the form of foster placement, adoption “or if necessary placement in suitable institution”. It is clear that the first option exercised by the authorities should not be institutionalization of a child in need of care and protection and the same is a measure of the last resort. Article 40(4) of the CRC pertaining to children accused of violating the law also states that the State Parties shall ensure “care, guidance, supervision, counseling, probation, foster care, education and vocational training and other alternatives to institutional care”. Indeed, in keeping with the spirit of the CRC, the JJ Act itself encourages alternatives to institutionalization such as adoption (Chapter VIII), foster care (Section 44) and Sponsorship (Section 45). This too needs some serious thought, as submitted by the learned Amicus.