Kerala HC Cautions Parents Against Taking Tender Age Children To Protests For Grabbing Attention, 'Wilful Neglect' Will Attract Strict Action

“If the law enforcing authority finds that the children are taken for protest, satyagraha, dharna etc at their tender age and if the intention is to attract attention to their protest, they have every right to proceed in accordance with the law. A small child below the age of 10 may not know the purpose of the protest, satyagraha, dharna etc. Let them play with their friends or go to school or sing and dance according to their wishes during their childhood. If any such willful acts from the parents by taking the child for such protest, satyagraha, dharna etc, stringent action should be taken by the law enforcing authorities.”

The petitioners in this case are the parents of a three-year-old child, against whom the police had registered an FIR under Sections 23 (punishment for cruelty to juvenile or child) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. They had approached the High Court seeking quashing of the proceedings.

The allegation against the petitioners was that they took their three-year-old to conduct a protest in the footpath in front of the Secretariat in Thiruvananthapuram. The police found the petitioners along with their child under the blazing sun in a sizzling temperature, in the month of May. When the petitioners declined to withdraw from the protest, the police registered the crime against them.

The Court stated that parents must not take their small children to protest, dharna, satyagraha to gain attention. Further, elaborating on the harms of taking small children to such places, the Court said, “Exposure to extreme temperatures without sanitation and crowded conditions can lead to illness in children. The agitations can disrupt the child's regular routine including meals, sleep, play, education etc. If a child is taken to a protest, there are chance for violence in the protest putting the child at the risk of physical harm. Moreover, loud noises, crowds and conflicts can cause emotional trauma to a child. When the parents are participating in agitations, protest, dharna, satyagraha etc, they may be distracted and unable to provide proper care during the agitations.”

In the present case, the Court observed that the petitioners had lost their another child due to medical negligence and noted although the government had sanctioned financial aid, the funds had not been disbursed to them.

The Court stated that to attract an offence under Section 23 of the JJ Act, there must be 'wilful neglect' against the juvenile or cause or procure the child to be assaulted, abandoned, exposed, or neglected to cause mental or physical suffering upon the child.

In the facts of the case, Court stated that death of another child might have forced the parents to conduct the protest. The Court took the view that it cannot be said that the petitioners had an 'intent' to inflict unnecessary mental or physical suffering to the 3-year-old. It thus concluded that criminal prosecution against the parents was not warranted, however, the Court emphasized that this decision should not be regarded as a precedent and if such incidents happen in future, the law enforcing machinery can take strict action in accordance with the law.

Counsel for Petitioners: Advocate P V Venugopal

Counsel for Respondents: Public Prosecutor Sangeetharaj N R

Case Number: CRL.MC NO. 6180 OF 2017

Case Title: Suresh v State of Kerala

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 600