Latest news with #JuvenileJustice(
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
3 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
No fundamental right of Indians to adopt US citizen child of relative: HC
An Indian does not have the fundamental right to adopt a child of American nationality even from among relatives when the child is neither "in need of care and protection" nor in "conflict with law", the Bombay High Court has said. A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale on Wednesday refused an Indian couple's plea to adopt their relative's son, who is a US citizen by birth. The child in the present case does not fall within the definition of either a 'child in need of care and protection' or a 'child in conflict with law' as per provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and Adoption Regulations, the HC said. "There is no provision in the Juvenile Justice Act nor the Adoption Regulations providing for adoption of a child of foreign citizenship even between relatives unless the 'child is in need of care and protection' or a 'child is in conflict with law'," it stated. The bench also refused to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to allow the adoption and said there is no "fundamental right" of the petitioners to adopt an American child. Neither is there any violation of any fundamental right of the child of American nationality to be adopted by an Indian citizen, it added. The couple will have to complete all necessary formalities of adopting the child from the US as per American laws and procedure, only after which they can go ahead with the post-adoption procedure in terms of bringing the foreign child adopted to India, the HC said. The couple sought to adopt their relatives' child, who is a citizen of the United States of America by birth. The Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA) refused to register the couple as prospective adoptive parents as the Adoption Regulations do not facilitate adoption of an American citizen. As per CARA, provisions of the Juvenile Act only permit adoption when the child is in need of care and protection or is a child in conflict with law. The child was born in the US in 2019, but the petitioner couple brought him to India when he was a few months old. The boy has since then been living with them and they were desirous of adopting him. The CARA informed the HC that it cannot give clearance for the adoption without the child first being adopted in the US under laws applicable in that country. The bench dismissed the petition, saying it was not inclined to allow the adoption. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
No fundamental right of Indians to adopt US citizen child of relative: Bombay HC
An Indian does not have the fundamental right to adopt a child of American nationality even from among relatives when the child is neither "in need of care and protection" nor in "conflict with law", the Bombay High Court has said. A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale on Wednesday refused an Indian couple's plea to adopt their relative's son, who is a US citizen by birth. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Select a Course Category Digital Marketing Data Analytics Others PGDM Healthcare MBA Design Thinking Product Management Operations Management Data Science Management Finance Leadership Technology Data Science Degree MCA Public Policy Artificial Intelligence Project Management healthcare CXO Skills you'll gain: Digital Marketing Strategies Customer Journey Mapping Paid Advertising Campaign Management Emerging Technologies in Digital Marketing Duration: 12 Weeks Indian School of Business Digital Marketing and Analytics Starts on May 14, 2024 Get Details The child in the present case does not fall within the definition of either a ' child in need of care and protection ' or a 'child in conflict with law' as per provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and Adoption Regulations , the HC said. "There is no provision in the Juvenile Justice Act nor the Adoption Regulations providing for adoption of a child of foreign citizenship even between relatives unless the 'child is in need of care and protection' or a 'child is in conflict with law'," it stated. The bench also refused to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to allow the adoption and said there is no "fundamental right" of the petitioners to adopt an American child. Live Events Neither is there any violation of any fundamental right of the child of American nationality to be adopted by an Indian citizen, it added. The couple will have to complete all necessary formalities of adopting the child from the US as per American laws and procedure, only after which they can go ahead with the post-adoption procedure in terms of bringing the foreign child adopted to India, the HC said. The couple sought to adopt their relatives' child, who is a citizen of the United States of America by birth. The Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA) refused to register the couple as prospective adoptive parents as the Adoption Regulations do not facilitate adoption of an American citizen. As per CARA, provisions of the Juvenile Act only permit adoption when the child is in need of care and protection or is a child in conflict with law. The child was born in the US in 2019, but the petitioner couple brought him to India when he was a few months old. The boy has since then been living with them and they were desirous of adopting him. The CARA informed the HC that it cannot give clearance for the adoption without the child first being adopted in the US under laws applicable in that country. The bench dismissed the petition, saying it was not inclined to allow the adoption. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
The Hindu
3 days ago
- The Hindu
Minor held on charge of bank robbery bid
A 17-year-old boy accused in a bank robbery case in Cheruvathur was arrested by the Chandera police and later released to his father's custody, as per the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. The boy was nabbed in connection with a break-in at the ESAF Bank near Pakkanar theatre in the early hours of June 29. He allegedly broke the lock, entered the premises, and attempted to breach the strongroom but failed. He then targeted a nearby hotel and a petrol pump, stealing ₹7,000 and a mobile phone. The police said that the boy was already wanted in several theft cases under the limits of Hosdurg, Kannur Town, Chandera, Nileswaram, Ambalathara and Bekal stations. As per the Juvenile Justice Act, a minor committing an offence for the first time must be released to the custody of a guardian. In line with this provision, the boy was produced before the court and released to his father.
India Today
4 days ago
- India Today
Pune Porsche crash case: How drunk teen escaped trial as adult
The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) on Tuesday dismissed the Pune Police's plea to try the 17-year-old accused in the deadly Porsche crash as an adult, ruling that the offence does not legally qualify as a "heinous crime". The ruling came after weeks of intense arguments by both the prosecution and the Pune police had approached the Board under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, arguing that the teen — son of a prominent real estate developer — was driving a luxury Porsche while being heavily drunk and killed two young IT professionals, Anish Awadhiya and Ashwini Costa, in Pune's Kalyani Nagar area last police said the crime was 'heinous' and pointed to alleged attempts by the boy's family and doctors to swap his blood samples to weaken FLAGGED EVIDENCE TAMPERING Special Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray argued that the circumstances of the case went beyond just reckless driving. "In this case, the boy was allowed to drink and drive. After the crash, there was an attempt to manipulate the judicial process by swapping blood samples. The integrity of the system was shaken," Hiray told the prosecution claimed that after the fatal crash, the boy's blood samples were collected at Sassoon Hospital but the police suspected tampering. A second sample was collected at Aundh Government Hospital as a safeguard. However, the accused, including the boy's parents, allegedly tried to get that sample swapped too but the doctors refused to CITED TOP COURT RULINGDefence counsel Prashant Patil countered that the Supreme Court's Shilpa Mittal vs State judgment makes clear that only crimes with a minimum punishment of seven years can be labelled 'heinous'."We had cited a Supreme Court judgement - Shilpa Mittal Vs State in which the SC has defined what constitutes a heinous crime. The guidelines decided by the Supreme Court are binding on everyone. However, the plea by the prosecution is contrary to the apex court's judgement. We demanded that since the plea is contrary to the SC guidelines, it is not maintainable," Patil counsel also said that to define a certain crime as heinous, the prosecution must have a section (invoked in the case) in which the minimum punishment is seven years."In the present case, there is not a single section which has a minimum punishment of seven years. So, we argued that the prosecution's plea is not maintainable," he JUVENILE BOARD SAID?After hearing both sides for nearly two months, the Board sided with the defence and concluded that the criteria for trying the teen as an adult had not been met."In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shilpa Mittal's case, considering the age and nature of the alleged offences, it being serious offences, the child should not be subjected to preliminary assessment under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The provision of preliminary assessment is only for heinous offences," the board the settled position of law, these applications are moved. Under such circumstances, Preliminary Assessment is not done and the Board is left with no option but to reject the said applications," it FILMSY PUNISHMENTThe teen was initially granted bail by the Juvenile Justice Court within hours of the fatal crash — on lenient terms that included writing a 300-word essay on road safety — triggering public outrage. He was later sent to an observation home, but the Bombay High Court ruled the remand illegal and ordered his release, insisting the juvenile law be fully a sessions court is still hearing arguments to frame charges against ten other accused, including the teen's parents. Currently, the boy's mother is currently out on bail while the other accused, incuding his father, remain in jail.- EndsMust Watch
Hindustan Times
11-07-2025
- Hindustan Times
Shahapur school remains shut, three more arrests
THANE: A day after public outrage over alleged forced menstrual checks on students in a Shahapur school in Thane district, three more arrests were made on Thursday, taking the total number of arrests to five. The accused include the school principal and attendant who conducted the checks. The school, a private, English-medium, co-ed institution, also remained shut on Thursday. Representative image (Getty Images/iStockphoto) Parents, furious at the incident, where schoolgirls were asked to strip, to check whether they were menstruating after bloodstains were found in the school toilet, pointed to recurring water shortages in the washrooms, which had compromised sanitary practices. They said that on Tuesday too, when the incident took place, there was no water in the toilet. A tanker was arranged on Wednesday, after parents stormed the principal's office and demanded immediate action for an act that amounts to an alleged violation of child rights. The Maharashtra State Women's Commission chairperson, Rupali Chakankar, visited the school on Thursday. She said that the school had failed to establish mandatory committees, including the Internal Complaints Committee and Sakhi Savitri Committee, according to the guidelines of the state education department. 'The principal should have focused on educating the girls about menstrual hygiene; she should not have humiliated them. This act is condemnable,' Chakankar said, adding that she had recommended that the school's registration be cancelled. The menstrual checks conducted on the students have left many feeling traumatised. Some have told their parents that they fear returning to school and facing their peers, particularly male classmates. Sneha Kismatrao, a parent whose son studies in the school joined the protesting parents. 'The principal is rude and arrogant, and despite repeated complaints to the trustees, her tenure was extended after retirement. There are four trustees, but they are rarely seen in the school. When we contacted one of them during the protest, they said they don't take calls before noon and would speak to the principal first. Their inaction has contributed to this situation.' The mother of one of the girls said, 'She was menstruating and was taken aside by the staff, who questioned her about stains on the toilet wall. At the time, there was no water in the washroom, which could have caused the stains. She couldn't explain the stains but was still blamed.' Another parent pointed out that the school authorities didn't seem to care about basic hygiene as there was frequently no water in the toilets. 'They called for a tanker only when we pointed out on Wednesday that the toilets had run dry.' Meanwhile, an officer with the Shahapur police station said that five arrests have been made and the accused have been charged under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. They have been remanded to police custody until July 15.
