MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Psychological Well-Being of Minor Paramount: Kerala High Court Orders Release from Child Welfare Custody

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


High Court directs child’s return to mother’s custody with strict conditions for protection and monitoring, emphasizes need for emotional support and counseling

The Kerala High Court has ordered the release of a minor girl from the custody of the Child Welfare Committee (CWC), emphasizing the child's psychological welfare and safety. The court's decision in the case WP(CRL.) No. 527 of 2024, presided over by Justices Raja Vijayaraghavan V and P.M. Manoj, highlighted the importance of a supportive and secure environment for the minor, who had been institutionalized following allegations of sexual offenses against her father.

The petitioner, the mother of the minor girl (referred to as Miss X for privacy), sought a writ of habeas corpus for her daughter’s release from the custody of the CWC. The child was taken into custody after a criminal case was registered against her father under Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. Despite the petitioner and the minor initially denying the allegations, the child was detained by the authorities. The petitioner argued that the allegations were false and the child’s detention was unlawful.

The court extensively reviewed the case records and the counseling report, which highlighted the significant distress and trauma experienced by Miss X due to her institutionalization. "The environment there appears to be exacerbating her emotional turmoil, which warrants immediate intervention," the bench noted.

The court emphasized the need for continuous psychological support and monitoring. "Given the immediate need for a supportive and secure environment, we are of the opinion that the child should be relocated to the One Stop Centre, Kakkanad (Sakhi) under the Women and Child Department," stated the judgment. This decision aimed to ensure that the Victim Rights Centre (VRC) could provide uninterrupted access to the child for counseling and support.

Considering the minor's upcoming attainment of majority, the court deliberated on the best course of action for her welfare. The bench decided in favor of reuniting Miss X with her mother under strict conditions. "The petitioner shall ensure that the child is not subjected to any physical or mental harm by any person whatsoever, including the father of Miss X," the court directed.

Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan remarked, "Further institutionalizing of the child is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. The mother has stated before us during interaction that she shall ensure that the child is not subjected to any harm or trauma."

The Kerala High Court’s judgment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to the psychological and emotional well-being of minors in custody disputes, particularly in cases involving allegations of sexual offenses. By directing the release of Miss X to her mother’s custody with stringent protective measures, the court has set a significant precedent for prioritizing the mental health and safety of children in similar circumstances. The decision is expected to have far-reaching implications, reinforcing the need for comprehensive support systems for vulnerable minors.

 

Date of Decision: July 1, 2024

Xxx vs State

Latest Legal News