'Safe Sex' Education Need Of The Hour: Kerala High Court Suggests Govt To Constitute Committee To Address Issue
Stressing on the need for proper ‘safe sex education’ among the youth, the Kerala High Court on Friday suggested the Government to consider constituting a committee and introducing ‘safe sex education’ in school and college curriculums. The Court asked the Chief Secretary to take appropriate action in this regard.The Court made this observation while considering a plea by a father...
Stressing on the need for proper ‘safe sex education’ among the youth, the Kerala High Court on Friday suggested the Government to consider constituting a committee and introducing ‘safe sex education’ in school and college curriculums. The Court asked the Chief Secretary to take appropriate action in this regard.
The Court made this observation while considering a plea by a father to medically terminate the pregnancy of his minor daughter impregnated by his minor son. A single bench of Justice P V Kunhikrishnan observed that such incidents take place due to lack of knowledge about safe sex:
“It is the duty of our society to keep these parents close to get over from this trauma. Nobody can blame the parents. But, we the society is responsible for this. Sibling incest may take place in the context of a family system that does not provide a safe environment for its members. But it may also happen because of the lack of knowledge about safe sex. I am of the considered opinion that the Government should seriously think about the necessity of proper ‘sex education’ in schools and colleges.”
When the matter first came up for consideration, the Court had allowed the termination of pregnancy stating that ‘social and medical complications are likely'. However, the Medical Board had submitted that since the minor was at 32 weeks of pregnancy, there was a chance of delivering a live premature baby that may face various health issues.
The Court was later informed that the minor girl had given birth to the infant. The Court then informed the father of the minor daughter that he was free to submit an application to the Child Welfare Committee for her restoration in accordance with Section 40 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
On Friday when the matter came up for consideration, the Court was informed that the Child Welfare Committee, Malappuram had handed over the minor mother to her uncle and that the new born child has been surrendered to the committee. Stating that ‘the protection of the new born child is the duty of the state', the Court directed the Child Welfare Committee to take necessary steps in accordance with law.
“These types of causalities shall not be there in our society in future. The embarrassment of the parents and also the victim girl cannot even be imagined. As I said earlier, this happened because of the lack of knowledge about the safe sex. Minor children are in front of ‘internet’ and ‘google search’. There is no guidance to the children.” The Court stated in its order.
Stressing on the need for educating young minds on ‘safe sex’ the Court said:
“Safe sex education is the need of the hour to avoid these type of embarrassment to the parents. A good family atmosphere is necessary in the society. To attain this, every citizen of this country should join together without pelting stone to such unfortunate people.”
Pursuant to the order of the Court allowing the termination of pregnancy, Adv. Kulathoor Jaisingh, had approached the Court seeking to be impleaded in the matter. The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice S.V. Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji had granted liberty to the applicant to move the Single Judge both for impleading himself as one of the respondents in the matter, as well as for the issuance of appropriate orders in the case. Jaisingh had appealed against the decision of the single bench stating that a baby in the womb cannot be terminated by a judicial order to save the "false pride" of social and mental health of the family of the victim girl without any evidence. The Single Bench subsequently allowed the impleading petition of the Adv. Jaisingh before closing the writ petition.
Case Title: XXX v Union of India
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 289
Click here to read/download order