HC Calls for Social Investigation Report for Every Child to Check Trafficking

Hyderabad:Telangana High Court Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh has stressed the need for a proactive child-protection mechanism, calling for a social investigation report to be prepared for every child so that vulnerabilities were identified before the children fall prey to trafficking, exploitation or delinquency.

The Chief Justice said the preparation of a social investigation report should not become a mere official formality or routine paperwork, but must provide a meaningful understanding of the child’s family circumstances, social environment, vulnerabilities and needs. Such an assessment, he said, would enable the authorities to take timely and informed decisions in the best interests of the child.

Addressing the annual state-level stakeholders consultation meet on the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, organised by the Judicial Academy to mark a decade of implementation of the legislation and discuss the way forward, the Chief Justice said protection of children could not be treated as the responsibility of any one department, the judiciary or NGOs.

Justice Singh called for sustained sensitisation of citizens and all stakeholders to ensure that no child fells prey to trafficking. Emphasising that every citizen had a responsibility towards children in need of care and protection, he said that a child may be safe within his or her own family environment but unless vulnerable children in society were also protected, the safety of every child remained at risk.

He pointed out that a neglected child could eventually drift into juvenile delinquency and, if left uncared for, could become a hardened offender. Referring to the Delhi rape incident of 2012, he underlined the consequences of failing to address vulnerabilities at an early stage.

Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya, High Court senior judge and chairperson of the Telangana Judicial Academy, said the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 was a strong, standalone legislation but its effective implementation depended on other laws, including the Pocso Act, 2012 and the BNS, 2023. She described the JJ Act as a child-centric and “soft” legislation that placed the child at the centre of the justice system, with emphasis on care, protection, rehabilitation and meaningful reintegration into society.

Sonykutty George, child protection specialist at Unicef, urged a review of the assessment process for children aged 16–18 involved in serious and heinous offences, cautioning against their unnecessary movement out of the juvenile justice system. He said the Unicef was ready to support to the state in child-centred interventions. High Court judges Justice Surepalli Nanda, Justice E.V. Venugopal, Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwara Rao, Justice Renuka Yara, Justice G.M. Mohiuddin, Justice Vakiti Ramakrishna Reddy and other stakeholders participated.

Telangana DGP Calls For Debate On Legal Framework Governing Age of Juveniles Accused of Heinous Crimes

Hyderabad: Director-General of Police C.V. Anand has called for a wider debate on whether the existing legal framework governing the age of juveniles accused of heinous crimes needed to be revisited, particularly in cases involving grave and calculated violence.

Anand referred to the recent murder of school principal Roopa Reddy in Nalgonda, allegedly by a juvenile following an incident related to disciplinary action. The incident, he said, raised difficult questions about the point at which a child accused of a heinous offence should continue to be dealt with entirely within the juvenile justice system and when the law should hold the person accountable as an adult.

Speaking at the annual state-level stakeholders consultation meet on the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, Anand said the consultation should examine whether the definition of “heinous offences” required reconsideration and whether the assessment framework should be made more rigorous and uniform. He also raised doubts whether the prescribed age threshold itself warranted discussion. He, however, cautioned that any change should not dilute the core principle of giving children an opportunity to reform and reintegrate into society.

Under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, children aged 16 to 18 accused of heinous offences can be subjected to a preliminary assessment by the Juvenile Justice Board to determine whether they should be tried as adults.

HC Directs DGP To Frame SOP For Dist. Police To Implement Judicial Directions

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court has directed the Director General of Police (DGP) to examine the issue of decree holders being compelled to approach the High Court for enforcement of orders passed by executing courts for police protection, and consider framing a standard operating procedure (SOP) for district police to ensure timely implementation of judicial directions, if it was not already in place.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin observed that repeated litigation over implementation of executing court orders could adversely affect the administration of justice across the state.

The court also observed that the extent of the police role in implementing an order granting protection for execution of a decree needed to be properly understood. The court said that police assistance must remain strictly within the scope of the order passed by the executing court. The court said an appropriate mechanism at the district level could help resolve such issues and prevent unnecessary litigation before the High Court for enforcement of orders passed by competent courts.

The bench made the observations while hearing an appeal filed by Peesari Gopaiah of Koratikal in Atmakur mandal of Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri district, challenging an order passed by a single judge directing the police to provide protection to decree-holder Nalla Venkata Reddy for fencing and boundary wall work on the disputed property. He got a decree over a disputed land in the sub-court and during the execution proceedings. The decree-holder filed executive petition seeking police protection for execution of the decree. The executing court had directed the Atmakur (M) station house officer to provide the required protection.

The order of the executing court was not challenged before any higher forum. However, alleging that the police had failed to provide adequate protection despite the executing court's direction, the decree-holder approached the High Court by way of a writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus.

During the writ proceedings, Mahesh Raje, government pleader for home, submitted that an FIR had been registered on the basis of the petitioner's complaint and that police protection would be provided if he sought assistance for re-fencing the land allegedly damaged by unofficial respondents. The single judge consequently directed the petitioner to approach the police by furnishing the date and time when protection was required and directed the police to provide protection for fencing or construction of a boundary wall over the subject property.

Challenging this direction, Gopaiah approached the division bench contending that the order could result in his possession being disturbed through the use of police force at the instance of the writ petitioner.

The bench noted the chronology of the proceedings and expressed concern over such “recurrent state of affairs” in which decree-holders were forced to approach the writ court for enforcement of orders passed by executing courts. Further, the bench said the issue could not be viewed as one confined to the present case. If such a situation was prevalent across the state, it required the attention of the competent authorities as it could impede the administration of justice.

The bench allowed three weeks to the government to deliberate on the issue with the DGP. It directed the DGP to examine whether inadequate police assistance in cases where executing courts had ordered protection was causing delays in execution of decrees across the state.