SC fiat to states & UTs on commissions for children rights
- PM Modi breaks silence on Dadri, says communal harmony will take country forward
- Mobile internet services cut in Jammu after recovery of cows' carcasses
- Volkswagen recalls 389 units of Polo model in India
- Air Force plans for women to fight wars: will they fly in the face of conventional non-combat roles?
- After Mumbai, Ghulam Ali's concert in Pune cancelled following Shiv Sena protest
Altogether 19 states and Union territories were asked today by the Supreme Court to explain their failure to set up commissions for protection of child rights through effective implementation of relevant laws.
A bench of justices S S Nijjar and S J Mukhopadhaya posted the matter for further hearing on January 14 after issuing notices to the states and UTs.
The bench passed the order after Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Indira Jaising said setting up of commissions for protection of child rights under Section 17 of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 in all the states was necessary for effective implementation of rights of children.
She said similar provisions of the 2005 law were also contained in the Protection of Rights of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
"These Commissions are necessary to monitor implementation of the provisions of the Act. Without such Commissions being appointed, there cannot be effective monitoring for implementation of these Acts," she emphasised.
The court directed the counsel appearing for various state governments "to seek specific instructions as to the steps already taken by the states for implementing the provisions of these Acts and, if not implemented, the time within which the necessary commissions will be constituted."
"It is made clear that any instructions that the counsel for aforementioned state need to take ought to be taken before the next date of hearing as it is the intention of the court to issue necessary directions on that date," the bench said.