A Court Cannot Deny Just Maintenance Merely Because the Applicant Claimed Less: Orissa High Court Upholds ₹10,000 Monthly Support for Elderly Wife Punjab and Haryana High Court Rejects Land Acquisition Challenge, Cites "Delay and Laches" as Key Factors Demand and Acceptance of Illegal Gratification Proved Beyond Doubt: Kerala High Court Affirms Conviction in Bribery Case Violation of Decree Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Application Under Order 21 Rule 32 CPC Ensuring Teacher Attendance Through Technology is Not Arbitrary, But Privacy of Female Teachers Must Be Protected: Madhya Pradesh High Court Upholds Circular Once a Mortgage is Permitted, Auction Sale Needs No Further NOC: Punjab & Haryana High Court Delay Defeats Rights: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Petition for Appointment as PCS (Judicial) After 16-Year Delay Minor Signature Differences Due to Age and Health Do Not Void Will if Testamentary Capacity Established: Kerala High Court Criminal Investigation Cannot Be Stalled on Grounds of Political Conspiracy Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Refused to Quash FIR Against MLA Munirathna Family Courts Must Prioritize Justice Over Technicalities" – Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Closing Wife’s Right to Defend Divorce Case Fraud Vitiates Everything—Sale of Debuttar Property by Sole Shebait Cannot Stand: Calcutta High Court Reassessment Cannot Be Used to Reopen Settled Issues Without New Material – Bombay High Court Quashes ₹542 Crore Tax Demand on Tata Communications Repeated FIRs Against Multiple Accused Raise Serious Questions on Motive: Allahabad High Court Orders CBI Inquiry Compensatory Aspect of Cheque Bounce Cases Must Be Given Priority Over Punishment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Income Tax | Transfer Pricing Adjustments Must Be Based on Economic Reality, Not Hypothetical Comparisons: Delhi High Court Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC is a Legal Mandate, Not a Mere Technicality: Kerala High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Police Officers A Contract Must Be Read as a Whole – Selective Interpretation Cannot Create Rights: Bombay High Court Preventive Detention Cannot Be a Substitute for Criminal Trial, but Habitual Offenders Cannot Claim Immunity: Delhi High Court Upholds NDPS Detention Self-Defence Cannot Justify Armed Assault—Force Must Be Proportionate to Threat: Punjab & Haryana High Court Public Service Commission Cannot Shift Stance on Qualification Criteria Arbitrarily – Kerala High Court in LDC Recruitment Case Mere Allegations Without Specific Instances of Cruelty Cannot Sustain Conviction Under Section 306 IPC: Himachal Pradesh High Court Conviction Cannot Rest on Suspicion—Proof Beyond Doubt Is the Only Standard: Delhi High Court Acquits Man Accused of Wife’s Murder Bank Cannot Hold Pledged Shares After Settlement of Dues: Bombay High Court Orders PNB to Return ITC Shares to Stockbroker Second Wife Entitled to Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC If De Facto Separation from First Marriage Proven: Supreme Court Extradition Cannot Be Ordered When Passport is Impounded: Supreme Court Quashes Order Against NRI Husband Justice Must Not Be an Illusion: Supreme Court Directs All Courts to Ensure Execution of Decrees Within Six Months Mere Inconvenience Cannot Override Statutory Jurisdiction in Cheque Bounce Cases: Supreme Court Rejects Transfer Petition Supreme Court Rules: Summoning Orders Under Section 319 CrPC Can Relate Back to Original Application Even After Trial Conclusion

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

Similar News