Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court

Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act

23 February 2025 10:11 AM

By: sayum


The Punjab and Haryana High Court has mandated the protection of a minor involved in a live-in relationship, highlighting the application of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The court directed the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) to ensure that the minor is produced before the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) and emphasized the need for appropriate measures to protect the minor's life and liberty.

The petition was filed by Parveen Kumar, aged 24, and his partner, a 17-year-old minor, seeking protection from the private respondents who are family members opposed to their relationship. The couple, asserting their right to life and liberty, moved the High Court after facing threats due to their live-in relationship. The petitioners had previously submitted a representation to the authorities but claimed no action had been taken.

The court, presided over by Justice Kirti Singh, noted the significance of ensuring the safety of minors involved in such sensitive situations. The judgment referred to the earlier case of P. Minor Through Vikram v. State of Haryana, where similar directions were issued to protect minors under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The court reiterated that the minor in the current case also qualifies as a "child in need of care and protection" under Section 2(14) of the Act.

The High Court ordered the SSP of the concerned district to depute a Child Welfare Police Officer to present the minor before the CWC within a week. The court directed the CWC to conduct an inquiry as stipulated under Section 36 of the Juvenile Justice Act and take appropriate measures for the minor's care and protection, including decisions regarding the minor’s living arrangements.

The court emphasized that the Juvenile Justice Act is designed to protect minors and ensure their well-being in all circumstances. By invoking the Act, the court ensured that the minor would receive the necessary care, protection, and oversight from the appropriate authorities, reinforcing the legal framework designed to safeguard children.

The judgment underscores the judiciary's commitment to protecting minors, especially in complex situations like live-in relationships. By applying the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, the court has set a precedent for similar cases, ensuring that minors receive the necessary protection and care. The directives issued in this case are expected to have significant implications for future cases involving minors in live-in relationships, reinforcing the legal protections available to them.

Date of Decision: 30.07.2024

 

Latest Legal News