Child welfare

The latest incident of a Deoria shelter home should be a wake up call for anyone caring for child welfare. Children, specially the ones who are handicapped, abused or separated from their families, are a responsibility of the society and the government. When a child is placed in a shelter, it is important that the shelter is carefully monitored to check the instances of abuse and neglect.
It is important that the government takes a number of steps to ensure the child welfare.
(1) An auditing body should be established that regularly monitors and keep records of the shelter homes. Inspectors should go for surprise checks at the shelters to ensure that no abuse is taking place there.
(2) Separate shelters for lost children, physically or mentally handicapped children and young adults should be created. Young women who have eloped from their homes should not be put in these shelters, rather their right of choice should be respected.
(3) A centralised data base of all children put in shelters should be created and be electronically accessible for people to trace the lost children. The data base should carry the child's name, age, photograph, physical description, location and date of being placed in the shelter.
(4) Shelter homes should be given temporary licences based on their performance. The staff of the shelter homes should be recruited by State agencies and be subject to job transfers.
(5) Children at shelter homes should have access to schools and proper health facilities, so that they can mingle with the outside world, reducing the chances of abuse at the shelter home.
(6) Children who reach majority should be trained can some trades so that they can lead their independent lives and not be dependent on the shelter home till they are married off.
Children are the responsibility of the society at large and people use make a conscious effort that they are protected and helped. The shelter homes should be accountable for their actions and carefully monitored to e ensure that instances of abuse are not repeated.

Taj and pollution

Clean air is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Air pollution has adverse effect on human and animal health and buildings amongst other other things. The marble of the Taj Mahal is being damaged by the growing air pollution in the Agra region. The Supreme Court had earlier this month asked the state government to frame a vision for curtailing the pollution levels. The State government has submitted a draft vision that states the following measures: making the region plastic free zone, having only trees and no buildings around the Yamuna banks, using green vehicles and not widening the roads going towards the Taj and closing down polluting and ailing industries in the region(Taj Trapezium Zone). The Court has warned the government that not taking care of the monument might take away its heritage building tag and that they should make firm steps to protect it. Afforestation, curbing vehicular emissions and closing down ailing industries are important measures for curbing the air pollution.

Preventive detention

A person's liberty can be curtailed either as a punitive or a preventive measure. Punitive detention is detention in the form of punishment for the commission of an offence. Preventive detention is, on the other hand, detention in apprehension of an offence.
Article 22 of the Constitution lays down safeguards and rights for a person who has been detained by the authorities. However, clause 3 states that such rights are not available to a person who has been detained under a preventive detention law. Clause 4 provides that a person detained under preventive detention law cannot be detained for a period exceeding three months unless an advisory board, having the qualifications to be appointed as a judge of a High Court, expresses its opinion before the expiry of three months that there is sufficient ground for detaining him for a longer period.
Article 22(5) provides that when a person has been detained under preventive measures, he has a right that the authority making the detention order:
(1) communicates the grounds of detention to him, unless it is against public interest, and
(2) provide him with an earliest opportunity for making a representation against such an order.
The Preventive Detention Act, 1950, provides that an order for preventive detention can be passed only on the following grounds:
(1) security of state and maintenance of public order,
(2) maintenance of supplies and essential services and,
(3) foreign affairs or defence and security of India. (Section 3)
Section 8 of the Act provides that the Central and State government to constitute one or more advisory boards consisting of three members.

Legalising the live in relationship

The Supreme Court has recently pointed out that two consenting adults have a right to live together without marriage in a case where a woman whose had been annulled. The Court asserted that she had a right to choose with whom she wanted to live with. The Court held that live in relationship have a legal status and have found a place under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. In the present case, the marriage of the appellants had been annulled because the man was not yet 21 years of age, the legal age for marriage under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, at the time of the marriage. The Court observed that even if the appellants were not competent to enter into wedlock at the time of marriage, being adults, they have the right to live together even outside the wedlock. The Court pointed out that a court cannot interfere in the marriage of two consenting adults and cannot annul a marriage.

Child marriage

The Child Marriage Restraint Act,1929, aimed at preventing the solemnisation of child marriages. It lays down the punishment for solemnisation of child marriages. Section 3 provides that a male between the ages of eighteen and twenty one years who enters into a child marriage shall be punished with a simple imprisonment of a term of fifteen days or fine upto one thousand rupees or both. Section 4 provides that a male above the age of twenty one years shall be punished with a simple imprisonment of three months and also fine. Section 5 provides the same punishment for solemnisation of child marriage. Section 6 prescribes the same punishment for the parents or guardians of the minor if they solemnise a child marriage or fail to prevent a child marriage from taking place. However, the Act prohibits women from being punished. Section 7 makes the offences under the Act cognizable in nature.
The Child Marriage Restraint Act has not been effective in preventing child marriages as it does not carry enough punitive result. Further, there is no social movement or awareness, specially in the rural areas to end child marriages.

Protection of civil rights

The Constitution of India rests on the principles of equality and bars any discrimination on the ground of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. Article 15 specially prohibits the State from discriminating on the ground of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. Clause (2) of the Article prohibits any discrimination on these grounds which leads to disability in accessing any shops, restaurants, hotels, places of entertainment or from using any public wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads or places of resorts. Similarly, Article 16 prohibits any discrimination on the basis of religion, race, caste, place of birth or sex in the matters of employment to any job or profession.
Article 17 of the Constitution bans the practice of untouchability and makes any practice of untouchability an offence. The Protection of Civil Liberties Act, 1955, was enforced to prescribe for providing punishment for the practice of untouchability and any disability arising out of such practice. Section 3 of the Act punishes the act of preventing any person on the ground of untouchability from entering any place of worship or worshiping with a punishment of imprisonment with a term of not less than one month which might extend upto six months and also a fine which would be not less than one hundred rupees but may extend upto five hundred rupees. Section 4 of the Act prescribes the punishment for causing disability in the matters of entering public hotels, restaurants, dharamshalas, shops and social places, using jewellery or following social customs. Sections 5 lays the punishment for preventing any person on the ground of untouchability from entering hospital, dispensary, hostel or any educational institution. Section 6 lays down the punishment for refusing to sell any item or rendering any services to any person on the ground of untouchability. Section 7 prescribes punishment for any other offences arising out of untouchability including molesting or insulting any person with a similar punishment. Section 7A similarly;arly punishes a person for forcing another to do human scavenging based on the ground of caste. Section 10 provides that an abetment of any offence under the Act shall be punished with the same punishment as the offence itself.

Daughters' right to inheritance

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court observed that the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 2005 giving equal rights to daughters on the ancestral property will be applied to all women including to those born before the year 2005. The amended law treats daughters as 'coparceners' in a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law since birth and would give them the same rights and liabilities as a son. The Court observed that a share in the ancestral property cannot be denied to any woman on the ground that she was born before 2005. The judgement further stated that the law is applicable in all property disputes filed before 2005 and pending when the law was framed. The judgement is a positive step towards ensuring the principle of equality and ensuring that daughters are treated with the same rights as sons. Earlier in 2015, the Apex Court had observed that for daughters to get share in the ancestral property, the father should have been alive in 2005 when the law was passed.