Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, March 31
In a judgment liable to change the way protection petitions by runaway minors in live-in relationships are adjudicated, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear the appropriate decisions in their matters will be taken by the committee constituted under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. The courts could not presume that their desire to stay with next friend/de facto guardian would actually be in their best interest.
“Determination of what would be in the minor’s best interest has to be done by the court as per the procedure known to law,” Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj asserted. The ruling makes a clear-cut departure from the prevailing procedure of straightaway granting protection to minors filing pleas through next friend/de facto guardian. Justice Bhardwaj’s Bench also issued seven commandments after taking upon itself the responsibility to ensure that a minor’s fundamental right to claim protection of life and liberty was made available, while ensuring that the “protection of the statute” was not violated in the process.
Justice Bhardwaj asserted the minors happened to fall within the definition of child in need of care and protection as provided under the Act. The SSPs/SP of respective districts would, as such, depute a child welfare police officer to produce the minor before the panel.
It would conduct an inquiry as contemplated under the Act before passing an appropriate order by associating all stakeholders and to ensure that the objects of the Act were well served. The committee would take appropriate decisions on their board and lodging and also conduct an inquiry on all issues relating to and affecting their safety and wellbeing.
The committee would also take appropriate interim/decisions regarding placement/custody of the child in need of care and protection during the pendency of such adjudication and passing orders.
The SSPs/SPs would also take appropriate steps as warranted by law regarding threat perception to the minor and “next friend” through whom they have approached the court. They would ensure the petitioners were protected from physical harm.
Justice Bhardwaj asserted it was not disputed that the persons through whom petitions were filed did not fall in any of the categories of guardians. There was nothing on record even to infer that the persons could be termed as de facto guardians in the absence of long-standing relationship.
Panel under JJ Act to decide pleas by runaway minors: HC
{$excerpt:n}
