Ministry's Website To Track Missing Children Not Working, Amicus Tells Supreme Court

The official website developed by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Union of India, to help the tracking of missing children is not accessing, the Supreme Court was told on Monday.

Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan, appointed as amicus curiae in a matter relating to a missing child, informed the Court that the link of the site "www.trackingmissingchild.gov.in" is not working. He further submitted that this fact has been communicated to the Additional Solicitor General, who assured to take necessary action.

The amicus pointed out that as per the Standard Operating Procedure formulated by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, the States have to upload the details of the missing children in this website. So, if the web link is not opening, the SOP will be defeated.

"The Ministry has under the SOP provided a web link for uploading the tracking of missing child by all states. That website even when we tried is not working and even the State of Uttar Prades has filed an affidavit saying that the link is not working. Learned ASG has said that he would take care that the link starts working. I amm not treating it as adversarial for larger interest, in there SOP only there is this web link which needs to work otherwise purpose of SOP's can't be achieved," submitted amicus.

He further submitted that the Ministry of Women and Child Development was required to file an affidavit with regards to the number of states following the SOP formulated after the Bachpan Bachaao Andolan.

"Ministry of Child Welfare were to file an affidavit. Instead of states coming and saying how many states have followed the SOP after Bachpan Bachaao Andolan, they need to come and tell. That also if they do it, 20-25% recoveries of children will improve," amicus further submitted.

A bench comprising Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice CT Ravikumar recorded in their order as follows :

"The Learned Amicus mentioned about some functional issues with the official website, "www.trackingmissingchild.gov.in" and submits that he has already indicated about that problem to the ASG and he has assured to take up the matter to the appropriate authority to take corrective steps as may be necessary. In addition he points out that there is no clear information about how many states/UT's have followed the instructions given in the SOP notified by the Union of India. In response, Ld ASG has assured the amicus to collate necessary information in that regard before the next date of hearing".

The bench was hearing a case pertaining to the kidnapping of a 13-year-old girl from Gorakhpur found by Delhi Police after having been untraceable for two months.

As regards the case, the Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the Child Welfare Committee ("Committee") to ascertain as to whether the Committee has formulated a child care plan under Rule 82.

The bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and CT Ravikumar also adjourned the habeas corpus petition filed by the missing girl's mother, suspecting a Delhi-resident to be the kidnapper. 

Accordingly, bench in its order said, 

"Mr K Vishwanathan, Ld Amicus Curiae has invited our attention to the orders passed by Child Welfare Committee (District, South) dated 2nd November, 2021, 9 December 2021 and 17th February 2022. He submits that there is no difficulty with the procedure followed by the Committee. However there is nothing in the order to indicate that the Committee has formulated a plan which it is required to do in terms of rules/protocol. To ascertain that position we deem it appropriate to issue notice to Child Welfare Committee to be served on the Secretary returnable on 25th March, 2022. Dasti in addition permitted"

Appearing for the petitioner(the girl's mother who filed the habeas corpus petition), Advocate Amit Pai sought issuance of directions for calling the child for investigation in presence of Councillor or somebody from Vihaan.

"Child is being called for investigation but issuance of directions that it must be in the presence of Councillor or something from Vihaan. Child is in class 9th & is being called for investigation," submitted Advocate Amit Pai.

"Is there anything on record that the child was called without such assistance? Don't create issues unless issues have arisen. Don't anticipate something unless it is there on the ground," Justice AM Khanwilkar, the presiding judge of the bench asked at this juncture.

On Advocate Pai responding that presently there was nothing on record, the Justice Khanwilkar said,

"If there is nothing on record, you can call the concerned police officer if such request is received that you cannot do it on your own and it should be done in following manner as per rules. He will follow it. What is the difficulty? We can't start with assumption that rules will not be followed by anyone. We are not sure whether the plan which the amicus has been referring to has been formulated or not & therefore we are issuing notice to the Committee to examine that position. Without giving notice to committee, can we issue directions that you prepare a plan? If its already done then?"

Accordingly the bench issued notice to the Committee to ascertain the aspect as to whether it had formulated a child care plan under Rule 82 or not and also adjourned the matter for March 25, 2022.

Case Title: WP(Criminal) 357/2021

Click Here To Read/Download Order