Child Beggary: Delhi High Court Issues Notice To DCPCR & Others On Plea For Rehabilitation Of Affected Children
The Delhi High Court today issued notice on a petition seeking requisite steps to eradicate the problem of child beggary and related problems in and around the national capital. A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Amit Bansal has made the notices returnable on September 27. The petition has been filed Advocate Ajay Gautam, seeking strict implementation of...
The Delhi High Court today issued notice on a petition seeking requisite steps to eradicate the problem of child beggary and related problems in and around the national capital.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Amit Bansal has made the notices returnable on September 27.
The petition has been filed Advocate Ajay Gautam, seeking strict implementation of the provisions contained in the Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005.
He states,
"Begging mafia is actively behind this menace of begging by the children and they in fact they kidnap, train, force and torture innocent children for begging. However, the department who is responsible for curbing this menace, has failed to take any remedial steps."
Accordingly, notices have been issued to the Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights, the Union of India, the Delhi Police, the Department of Social Welfare (NCT of Delhi) and the Department of Education (NCT of Delhi).
In his plea, Gautam has sought direction upon the concerned Respondents to identify and rehabilitate destitute children who are pushed into begging.
He further seeks a direction to the Station House Officers (SHOs) of all Police Stations to take appropriate steps for preventing child begging in the areas under their jurisdiction and a beat officer I division officer be appointed in this regard.
"No child begs for himself. They are forced into it as a part of organized crimes… These children are given daily targets. They are abused, subjected to violence," he alleged before the Court.
He contended that such activities not only antithetical to the judgment of Bandhua Mukti Morcha which was against bonded labour, but is also violative of the Constitutional provisions under Article 14 (right to equality), 21 (right to life and dignity), 39(e) (children to not be forced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to their age or strength), 39(f) (children to be given facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity), 41 (Right to education and public assistance) and 42 (Provision for just and humane conditions of work).
Case Title: Ajay Gautam v. Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights & Ors.