If Child Works Voluntarily Then Sections 75 & 79 Of Juvenile Justice Act Do Not Apply: Telangana High Court
In a recent order, Justice K. Surender of Telangana High Court held that where a juvenile who works voluntarily, Sections 75 and 79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 do not apply. Section 75 provides for punishment, if any person having control of child, assaults, abandons, abuses or willfully neglects the child. Section 79 deals with punishment...
In a recent order, Justice K. Surender of Telangana High Court held that where a juvenile who works voluntarily, Sections 75 and 79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 do not apply.
Section 75 provides for punishment, if any person having control of child, assaults, abandons, abuses or willfully neglects the child. Section 79 deals with punishment for exploitation of a child employee. It prescribes punishment for acts of ostensibly engaging a child and keeping him in bondage for the purpose of employment or withholding his earnings or using such earnings for one’s own purposes.
The facts of the case were that the volunteer in District Child Protection Unit, Medchal District along with team deployed for operation Muskan conducted search for rescuing children employed as labourers. In Everbest Foods Company, it was found that four girls of the age 17, one girl of 16 and another of age 14 years were working in the company.
The police after investigation filed charge sheet for the offences under Sections 75 and 79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 against the employer of the company, Petitioner/Accused herein.
The Criminal Petition was filed to quash the proceedings on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate for the offences under Sections 75 and 79 of the Act.
In the presents facts of the case, it was observed from the record of the case that the juveniles who were employed had testified that they were working due to financial problems. The witnesses did not speak about any assault by the accused or abandoning or any kind of physical or mental suffering.
For the said reasons, the proceedings against the petitioner/Accused under Sections 75 and 79 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 were quashed and Criminal Petition was allowed.
Advocate Baglekar Akash Kumar appeared for the petitioner.
APP Sri S.Sudershan appeared for the State.
Case Title: Kothakonda Aishwarya v. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Public Prosecutor
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Tel) 2