Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Joseph vs State Of Karnataka Ministry Of Home And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|18 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. N. PHANEENDRA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN WPHC No. 19/2019 BETWEEN SRI. JOSEPH S/O C. NARAYAN AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT NO.18, 7TH MAIN WATER TANK ROAD NANJAPPA GARDEN ITI LAYOUT MALLATH HALLI BENGALURU – 560 056 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. JAVEED S. ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA MINISTRY OF HOME VIDHAN SOUDHA BENGALURU – 560 001 2. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KENGERI GATE SUB-DIVISION ANNAPOORNESHWARI NAGAR PS BENGALURU – 560 056 3. SRI. MANI S/O NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS OCC: WATCHMEN R/AT OPP. TO NO.18 7TH MAIN, WATER TANK ROAD NANJAPPA GARDEN ITI LAYOUT, MALLATH HALLI BENGALURU – 560 056 4. SMT. LATHA W/O MANI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT OPP. TO NO.18 7TH MAIN, WATER TANK ROAD NANJAPPA GARDEN ITI LAYOUT, MALLATH HALLI BENGALURU – 560 056 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANDESH J. CHOUTA, ADDL. ADV. GENERAL A/W SRI. S. V. GIRIKUMAR, AGA) THIS WPHC IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT, IN THE NATURE OF HABEAS CORPUS TO PRODUCE THE DETENUE SANTHOSH S., AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT.
THIS WPHC COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, K.N.PHANEENDRA J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The petitioner is present before the Court. The detenue by name Master Santhosh, aged 14 years, the grandson of petitioner is produced before the Court by Sri. Lingaraj, the Police Inspector, Annapoorneshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru. In fact, we have examined the Child (detenue) and we find that he is not mentally sound.
2. The learned Additional Advocate General has also produced the Medical Certificate issued by the Department of Psychiatry, NIMHANS, Hosur Road, Bengaluru, in respect of the mental condition of the Child (detenue) certifying that, the Child (detenue) has been suffering from Mild Mental Retardation and his IQ is 51%, and he has suffered 50% of mental disability.
3. We have also examined the petitioner [the grandfather of the detenue (child)] present before the Court about his avocation and capability of taking care of the detenue (Child). He submitted that, he is an un- employee and his son is doing masonry work and he is the only bread-winner of the family, and his daughter, ie., the mother of the child (detenue) is also not keeping sound mental health. Therefore, the petitioner has no objection for the court passing appropriate orders regarding the proper care and protection of the detenue (Child), aged 14 years.
4. The learned Additional Advocate General has very sensibly submitted before the Court that, under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, ( for short, JJ (CPC) Act, 2015’) the detenue may be referred to the Child Welfare Committee (for short, ‘the CWC’), Sudharana Samsthe Complex, Hosur Road, near NIMHANS, Bengaluru, for the purpose of taking appropriate measures to keep the detenue (Child) in any of the recognized Institutions of its choice, which can take care of the physical and mental health of the Child.
5. Looking to the above circumstances, we do not find any reason to completely reject the petition and send the Child (detenue) along with his grandfather. We have also perused the provisions of JJ (CPC) Act, 2015, which says that, any child which needs care and protection, may be produced before the CWC, which can take over all care of such children. Admittedly, the Child (detenue) is aged 14 years.
6. As per Section 31 of JJ (CPC) Act, 2015, if any child in need of care and protection may be produced before the Committee by any person whoever finds such child, including any Police Officer or Special Juvenile Police Unit or a designated Child Welfare Police Officer or any Inspector appointed under any Labour Law for the time being in force, and also any public servant and social worker etc. After production of such child before the CWC, an enquiry has to be conducted by the said Committee as contemplated under the provisions of Section 36 and pass appropriate orders under Section 37 of the said Act. The provisions of the said Act are contemplated mainly to safeguard the interest with reference to taking care and protecting the welfare of the children.
7. Looking to the above facts and circumstances of this particular case it is clear that, the mental health condition of the detenue (Child) aged about 14 years is not good and he is suffering from 50% mental retardation and the family members ie., the grandfather and mother are also not so capable of taking care of the child (detenue). Therefore, we feel it just and necessary to accede to the submission made by the learned Additional Advocate General for sending the child (detenue) to CWC for proper care and protection and to follow the relevant procedures as contemplated under the JJ (CPC) Act, 2015 and thereafter to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
8. With the above observation, we proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER The child (detenue) is given back to Mr. Lingaraj, the Police Inspector of Annapoorneshwari Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, with a direction to produce the said child before the Chair Person, CWC, Sudharana Samsthe Complex, Hosur Road at Dr. M.H. Maligowda Road, Near NIMHANS, Bengaluru and the Chair Person of CWC is in turn directed to take the child (detenue) to their custody and follow the procedure as contemplated under the JJCPC Act, 2015 and take utmost care of the health of the child (detenue). After conduct of due enquiry, the said Committee to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Further the Chair Person of the CWC is also hereby directed to allow the mother or the grandfather of the said child (detenue) to the place where the child (detenue) is temporarily lodged, as and when they wish to meet him, till passing of appropriate orders by CWC.
With the above observations and directions, the petition is disposed of.
The Registry is directed to issue a free copy to the learned Addl. Government Advocate to enable concerned to comply with the directions issued by this court.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE KGR*
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Joseph vs State Of Karnataka Ministry Of Home And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
18 February, 2019
Judges
  • K N Phaneendra
  • K Natarajan