TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court rejects separate schools for children of prostitutes, opts for rehabilitation committee.</h1> <h3>GAURAV JAIN Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.</h3> GAURAV JAIN Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. - (1997) 8 SCC 114, 1997 AIR 3021 Issues:- Petition for setting up separate schools and hostels for children of prostitutes- Constitutionality of segregating prostitutes' children- Recommendations of the Committee for the rehabilitation of children of prostitutes- Scope of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956- Public interest litigation and interpretation of laws without proper parties and pleadingsAnalysis:The Supreme Court received a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution filed as public interest litigation, seeking the establishment of separate schools with vocational training and hostels for children of prostitutes to prevent them from entering immoral professions. Initially, the petitioner was directed to amend the petition to focus on setting up juvenile homes as per the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. Subsequently, the court did not accept the idea of segregating prostitutes' children through separate schools and hostels, believing it would not be in the children's best interest. Instead, a Committee was formed to address the issues faced by these children, focusing on the viability of separate schools and hostels, existing laws, and a national-level rehabilitation scheme.The Committee, after examination, submitted a report with recommendations for the rehabilitation of children of prostitutes. The judgment emphasized that the eradication of prostitution was not the primary issue in the proceedings or the Committee's discussions. It highlighted the enactment of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, later amended in 1986, as a legislative measure to combat immoral trafficking. The Act aimed to address inadequacies in enforcement, strengthen penal provisions, and enhance correctional treatment and rehabilitation standards for victims.The judgment refrained from delving into public interest litigation without proper parties, informed pleadings, and comprehensive discussions. It stressed the importance of hearing concerned parties, including the Union of India and State Governments, on profound issues like prostitution. While concurring with the directions related to establishing juvenile homes for children of prostitutes, the judgment expressed dissent on addressing prostitution directly and issuing related directions. It also raised considerations regarding the application of Article 142 and 145(5) of the Constitution in the given circumstances.
TaxTMI 