Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

13.3. It was further submitted that the second respondent, namely, the Department of Social Welfare, Government of NCT of Delhi, administers various statutory and non-statutory social welfare programmes for the weaker sections of society and is entrusted with the implementation of social legislations such as the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, the Juvenile Justice 2 (1987) 2 SCC 179 (Care and Protection of Children) Act, and the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 (BPBA). The Department of Social Welfare functions as the nodal agency for the implementation of the BPBA, which was extended to the NCT of Delhi in the year, 1960. For the purpose of operationalising the Act, the Government notified the Delhi Prevention of Begging Rules, 1960. 13.4. It was further pointed out that there are eleven statutory institutions established for accommodating beggars during their trial and sentence periods, as determined by the Beggars’ Court. In addition to the regular Beggar’s Court, two Mobile Beggars’ Courts were also set up in 2009. The duration of detention in these institutions varies according to the merits of each case. The daily life of the inmates is regulated in accordance with the Department’s Manual, which provides for free food, lodging, boarding, clothing, bedding, medical care, recreation, and rehabilitation facilities.

15. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for all the parties, including Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel, who has ably assisted the Court as Amicus Curiae. We have also perused the entire materials available on record.

16. Historically, the treatment of the indigent persons has oscillated between two diametrically opposed paradigms – criminalisation on the one hand and compassion on the other. In early modern England, the Elizabethan Poor Laws of 1601 institutionalised a moral distinction between the "deserving poor" – those unable to work due to age, disability, or illness – and the "undeserving poor", typically the able-bodied unemployed, vagrants, or itinerants. While the former could receive parish relief, the latter were subjected to harsh punitive measures, including confinement in workhouses, corporal punishment, or forced labour. These measures were grounded not in a rehabilitative ethic but in a disciplinary and deterrent framework aimed at social control. 16.1. This colonial attitude travelled to India under British rule. Vagrancy laws – including the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 (and its variants in other states) – were introduced not as instruments of social welfare, but as tools of public order and colonial governance. Their design mirrored the Victorian and Edwardian suspicion of poverty as a moral failing rather than a socio- economic condition. Even in the post-independence period, this punitive legacy has endured in the anti-begging statutes of several Indian States, which often permit the arrest, detention, and forced confinement of persons merely on the basis of appearance or circumstance, without commission of any substantive offence.

17. At the outset, it is necessary to understand the scope, ambit, and purpose of the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 (in short, “BPBA”), as extended to the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Originally, enacted in Maharashtra, the BPBA has been adopted or adapted by several States and Union Territories to regulate and control begging. Its enforcement, however, varies significantly, across jurisdictions, and its constitutional validity has been tested on multiple occasions.

17.1. Notably, in Harsh Mander v. Union of India5, the Delhi High Court struck down certain provisions of the BPBA which criminalized begging, holding them to be violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Importantly, there is no central law uniformly governing begging 5 AIR 2018 Del 188 in India. The subject falls within the competence of both Union and State legislatures, and is predominantly regulated through State or UT legislation. 17.2. Several States and Union Territories have enacted their own laws modelled substantially on the BPBA. These include:

 The Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Begging Act, 1977  Assam Prevention of Begging Act, 1964  The Bihar Prevention of Beggary Act, 1951  The Goa, Daman and Diu Prevention of Begging Act, 1972  The Madhya Pradesh Biksha Vritti Nivaran Adhiniyam, 1973  The Gujarat Prevention of Begging Act, 1959  The Haryana Prevention of Beggary Act, 1971  The Himachal Pradesh Prevention of Beggary Act, 1979  The Punjab Prevention of Beggary Act, 1971  The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975 (adopted by Uttarakhand)  The Karnataka Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975  The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Begging Act, 1945 (earlier known as The Madras Prevention of Begging Act, 1945)  The Sikkim Prohibition of Beggary Act, 2004  The Bengal Vagrancy Act, 1943  The Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Beggary Act, 1960.