Madras HC asks TN to form panel to fix gaps in child protection laws
The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary to constitute a committee comprising the Home Secretary, Health Secretary and Law Secretary to examine a set of suggestions aimed at addressing systemic shortcomings in the implementation of criminal laws related to children. The direction came as the court disposed of a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by advocate S. Venkatesh of Madurai.
A Division Bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and V. Lakshminarayanan issued the order on Thursday, asking the State government to bestow its attention to the suggestions and revert within four months. The Bench also said the committee should consider the recommendations made by the court, which was assisted by Deepika Murali, counsel for child rights organisation Tulir, in identifying gaps in the handling of cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and the Juvenile Justice Act.
The PIL had sought a direction to the State government to file a curative petition before the Supreme Court against the acquittal of engineering graduate S. Daswant, who was accused of sexually assaulting and murdering a seven-year-old girl in Mugalivakkam near Chennai in February 2017. Daswant was acquitted of the charges by the top court, prompting the petitioner to seek intervention.
The Bench, however, declined to issue such a direction, observing that litigation is a discretionary act and no citizen or third party has a vested legal right to compel the State to approach a court. “We are afraid, a citizen, nay, a third party does not possess a vested legal right to force the State of Tamil Nadu to litigate,” the judges wrote. Nevertheless, since the State government itself had voluntarily informed the court of its intention to file a curative petition, the Bench recorded the submission and closed the petition on that aspect.
The court then turned its attention to broader structural issues. It noted that police often register cases only against male children in instances of consensual relationships between minors, despite the POCSO Act being gender-neutral. “This unduly criminalises adolescent relationships,” the Bench observed. As a result, the judges suggested that when a girl's parents insist on filing an FIR, police should inform them that the male child's parents or guardians have the same right to be informed, and the FIR copy should be provided free of cost with due acknowledgement.
The court also advised that police may avoid registering FIRs against minor boys for non-heinous offences, and recommended a standard operating procedure for sharing a child's identity with schools, hospitals and other agencies only on a need-to-know basis. The Bench further emphasised the need for clear protocols for medical termination of pregnancies and medical examination of male victims in POCSO cases.
Other suggestions included providing child witness deposition rooms in every POCSO court and increasing the number of such courts to expedite trials. The court directed the Chief Secretary to ensure that the committee examines these recommendations and reports back within four months.
