HC seeks reply from Centre and Delhi on cases pending in 7 juvenile justice boards
The HC has sought replies from the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Delhi government's Department of Women and Child Development, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, and others.
According to the PIL, moved by I-Probono (India) Legal Services, a non-profit social justice organisation, through its authorised signatory Binita Saket Modi, a total of 206 petty offence inquiries have been pending in four of the seven JJBs in Delhi, beyond the mandated six-month period, even though the law prescribes automatic termination of such cases.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, on Wednesday issued the notice to the authorities and posted the matter next for consideration on September 24.
The bench also suggested that the petitioner make an appropriate representation before the JJB Committee of Delhi HC.
The organisation, which also offers psychosocial support to children and works closely with the child welfare committee, stated in their petition that at one JJB, '31 petty offence cases have remained unresolved for over a year, while three cases have been pending for over five years, demonstrating extreme administrative negligence.'
Additionally, in the seven JJBs of Delhi, '978 cases of serious offences and 1274 cases of heinous offences have been pending for more than six months, despite the statutory mandate for their expeditious disposal. Alarmingly, 284 cases of serious and heinous offences have been pending for over five years, exposing the utter disregard for the spirit and intent of the JJ Act [Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015],' the PIL notes.
Another 284 cases of serious/heinous offences have been pending for over five years, said the PIL. While there is no specified time limit for completion of inquiry in cases of serious/heinous offences, however, courts have repeatedly cautioned that such extensions ought to be granted keeping
in mind the spirit of the JJ Act, giving the same a purposive meaning.
The PIL has also flagged that JJBs have 'failed to furnish quarterly reports to the CJM (chief judicial magistrate), CMM (chief metropolitan magistrate), and District Magistrate' as is required under provisions of the Act, and that 'additionally, there is no evidence of quarterly reviews being conducted by CJMs or CMMs, in contravention of' provisions of the Act.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
18 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Maramadi, an agrarian sport fading into oblivion
PATHANAMTHITTA: Conducted in ankle-deep slushy fields after the paddy harvest, 'Maramadi', (bull surfing) is not just a race for the villagers of Anandapally in Pathanamthitta, but a symbol of traditional farming, one where man, animal and mud merge in a unique spectacle of tradition and toil. However, the harvest race that once drew thousands to the muddy fields near Anandapally in Adoor during the Malayalam month of Chingam is nearly extinct today. The race was a sight to behold. A pair of bulls yoked to a wooden plank charged down a 100-m waterlogged track, with a rider clinging to the log and two runners guiding them. For viewers, it was rhythm, tradition and unwavering spirit – 'agriculture in motion', as many dubbed it. Started in the 1950s in Adoor Puthuveettil Padi Ela, Anandapally Maramadi was held annually after paddy harvest until 2008, following a Supreme Court directive that banned events involving the use of animals, including Tamil Nadu's Jallikattu. 'While states like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra subsequently passed legislation allowing traditional bull-related sports to resume following a 2017 amendment by the Centre, Kerala has yet to follow suit,' said Varghese Daniel, president of the Anandapally Karshaka Samithi (AKS), the organisers of the Maramadi. Despite promises from successive state governments, neither a Bill has been passed nor an ordinance promulgated to permit Maramadi. 'We were told an ordinance would be brought. Even the CM publicly assured it. But nothing has moved forward,' said AKS secretary V K Stanley. The organisers said Maramadi attracted over 60 bull pairs from eight districts as well as large crowds, including foreign tourists. The event traditionally took place on August 15 during Independence Day celebrations. Bulls, often brought from Tamil Nadu, were specially trained and maintained by local farmers for a considerable cost. Cultural significance Beyond entertainment, Maramadi carried cultural and agricultural significance, serving as a platform to showcase indigenous farming practices and tools, encouraging youth participation in agriculture and promoting rural tourism.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Eknath Khadse's son-in-law arrested during drug party in Pune
Pune Police on Sunday arrested seven people, including Pranjal Khewalkar, son-in-law of senior NCP (SP) leader Eknath Khadse, after busting an alleged drug party at a studio apartment in an upmarket area of Kharadi. The raid was carried out around 3:40 am following a tip-off received by the Crime Branch. Blood samples of all seven accused have been sent for forensic analysis to determine whether they had consumed narcotics. (HT) According to police, the raid led to the seizure of 2.70 grams of a cocaine substance, 70 grams of ganja, 10 mobile phones, two cars, hookah sets, liquor bottles, and various party paraphernalia—all worth approximately ₹41.35 lakh, police said. Blood samples of all seven accused have been sent for forensic analysis to determine whether they had consumed narcotics. The accused include Khewalkar, a 41-year-old MD in medicine, and husband of NCP (SP) state unit chief of women wing, resident of Hadapsar; along with Nikhil Popatani, 35, involved in the cigarette business; Sameer Sayyad, 41, who works in hardware materials business; Sachin Bhombe, 42, a private employee; Shripad Yadav, 27, a contractor; and two young women identified as Isha Singh, 22, from Aundh, and Prachi Sharma, 23, from Mahalunge. Police said the arrested individuals knew each other and had been in contact through calls and messages. Preliminary findings suggest the group had attended a party at a well-known pub in the city before assembling at the rented studio apartment. Investigators confirmed that three rooms had been booked in the building from July 25 to July 28, each costing ₹10,357 per night. Around 45 minutes before the raid, all seven had gathered in the flat. Following the arrests, police searched Khewalkar's bungalow in Hadapsar, Sai Krupa, and seized laptops, CDs, and other items. Crime Branch officials revealed that Popatani and Yadav have criminal records. Popatani was booked in 2023 by Kondhwa police under IPC sections 420 and 34, and sections 66(c) and 66(d) of the IT Act, reportedly for online betting. Yadav was booked in 2022 by the Bund Garden police under the Maharashtra Prevention of Gambling Act. A Crime Branch officer said an earlier attempt to detain the group on Friday had failed. However, based on fresh information, they moved in on Saturday night and arrested the seven with drug-like substances. 'The police have registered a case under sections 8(c), 21(b), 22(b)(ii)(a), and 27 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, and sections 7(2) and 20(2) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), at the Kharadi police station,' said deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime) Nikhil Pingale. Police said they are now trying to identify three more people reportedly seen at the apartment during the party,' said NCP (SP) leader Eknath Khadse, reacting to the arrest of his son-in-law, said he had not spoken to him and was aware of the incident only through media reports. 'If a fair investigation reveals it was a rave party and my son-in-law is guilty, I will not defend him. But the police must act impartially. The perception among people is that police can do anything, so let the truth come out through forensic and blood reports,' Khadse said. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said he had seen media reports but had not yet received an official briefing. 'Preliminary information suggests that a rave party was busted and some narcotics were found,' he said. Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar said the police were acting as per rules and anyone found guilty would face consequences. MP Supriya Sule also reacted to the case, saying her party stood behind Rohini Khadse, wife of the arrested Khewalkar. Sule expressed concern over the possibility of tampering with reports, especially in light of past incidents at Sassoon Hospital. 'We will ensure a full investigation takes place, but my concern remains with how evidence is handled,' she said. Officials said the investigation is ongoing, with police verifying the identities of others who may have attended the party and reviewing communications.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Uncertainty around US tariffs will not be over after August 1, even with signed trade deals
The US tariff saga has gone through many twists and turns. And many more are likely left. The ratcheting up of tariffs last month is broader and higher than expected. In late May, the view was that while the extant US average tariff rate was around 13-14 per cent, it was headed towards 18-20 per cent. Much of the increase was expected to be focused on ASEAN, where the tariff rate would be raised to that of China's to eliminate transshipment of Chinese exports to the US via the region. While those on Vietnam and Indonesia were in line with expectations, the additional tariffs on Brazil, Canada, and Mexico were not. Nor was the higher 50 per cent rate on copper. However, negotiations are ongoing, including with India, the EU, and Korea. If this week's Japan deal is any guide, tariffs on these economies will likely be half of the threatened levels. But, even at the reduced rate, if these, along with those on EU and the likely extensions of global sectoral tariffs to semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, are realised, then the effective tariff rate could well exceed 20 per cent. All eyes are therefore on August 1, which is the new deadline set by the administration for countries to finalise trade deals. But there is an upcoming and surprisingly overlooked event that could easily make these trade deals moot and plunge the tariff discussions into more uncertainty. On May 28, the US Court of International Trade (USCIT) ruled that tariffs imposed using the provisions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) overstepped the authority granted by the Act. The ruling did not consider the current conditions in the US to be a 'state of emergency,' which is needed to invoke IEEPA, to be convincing nor the use of tariffs to address it. Tariffs could be imposed, if the government so desired, but via the other options at its disposal. Not IEEPA. A federal appeals court granted the government a stay on the order and is slated to begin hearing arguments on the appeal on July 31. All the universal, reciprocal, and fentanyl-related tariffs are based on IEEPA. The tariffs unaffected are the Section 301 tariffs on China imposed under Trump 1.0 and extended by the Biden administration, and the global sectoral tariffs on aluminum, autos and auto parts, copper, and steel that were imposed under Section 232. It is unclear how the appeals court will rule. But regardless of the decision, either party is likely to move the case to the Supreme Court. If the tariffs under IEEPA are eventually disallowed by the US Supreme Court, the government will shift to other options. Tariffs are central to this administration's economic agenda and will thus be pursued. Unlike those under IEEPA, the tariffs under the other options are more cumbersome, limited in scope, and significantly more resource intensive. But they can be implemented in a compressed time frame if the administration so desires. A potential sequence of such actions could be the following. Use Section 122 to impose tariffs of 15 per cent for 150 days on all countries (justified to address balance of payments needs or to prevent a significant depreciation of the dollar). At the same time, ratchet up the tariffs on China that were imposed under Section 301 in Trade War 1.0 by both the Trump and Biden administrations. Keep tariffs on steel and aluminum at 50 per cent (as on copper) and raise that on autos from 25 per cent to 50 per cent. Hasten the ongoing Section 232 (sector specific on grounds on national economic security) investigations into semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and lumber to bring these under the tariff net of 25 per cent – 50 per cent. Use Section 338 to impose tariffs on countries that are deemed to discriminate specifically against US commercial interests (such as digital services taxes by Australia, the EU, Canada, India, and others, although the taxes are imposed on other countries too). Complete Section 301 investigations on large trading partners (some are ongoing, for example, on the EU and Brazil). These investigations are resource intensive as they need to first identify the specific policy of a trading partner that is the basis of 'unfair competition 'and then quantify the 'harm' that such policies impose on US consumers for each product and for each country. The tariff rate needs to be commensurate with the harm caused and, thus, differ, from product to product for each country. Finally, roll all tariffs under Sections 301 and 232. As one can imagine, this is an arduous and uncertain process. However, the direction of travel is more certain — the average effective tariff rate is likely to settle close to 20 per cent. Needless to say, the country- and product-specific impact of Sections 301 and 232 tariffs could be vastly different than under IEEPA. Markets so far have largely shrugged off the announced new tariffs. This is understandable given the quick deescalation after the strong market and corporate reaction to the Liberation Day tariffs; the possibility that the August 1 deadline is postponed; and the eventual negotiated tariff rates could be different from those announced. However, a court ruling on IEEPA could well turn both the August 1 deadline and the trade deals moot, including potentially that with India. If the basis of these deals, that is, IEEPA, is no longer admissible, then we are headed for renegotiations with tariffs under sections 301 and 232. These could be starkly different than those that are being negotiated now. The uncertainty around US tariffs will not be over after August 1, even with signed trade deals. US courts might well upset the best laid plans of mice and men. Continued uncertainty is the only certainty. The writer is Chief Emerging Markets Economist, J P Morgan. Views are personal
