Bombay High Court: The Court took suo motu cognizance based on a newspaper report wherein the issue of transferring girl inmates from observation homes in Aurangabad to other districts after they attained majority was addressed. The Division Bench of Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay A. Deshmukh, JJ., noted that the Child Welfare Committee declared the girls in observation homes as “child in need of care and protection” and opined that education being their fundamental right, could not be affected by the mere reason of them being transferred to another district because they attained majority.
The Court came across a newspaper report in daily newspaper “Divya Marathi” which gave an interview of a girl, who had recently attained majority and process of sending her to the other district had been started. The orphan girls who were declared as “child in need of care and protection” by the Child Welfare Committee (‘CWC’) were sent to Mumbai or Nashik in the shelter homes as there was no facility for such girls in Aurangabad after they attained majority. There was also the factor of vacancy being available in those shelter homes that was to be considered. It was also reported that there were three observation homes for girls in the city wherein 300 girls were kept, which included girls from poor family, orphan or single parents or disabled or children of convicts and that each year 20 girls who attained majority were sent to other districts.
The Court opined that it was aware that the education was being given to the girls in the observation homes which was their right being a citizen of the country, but their transfer from the place where they grew up till the age of 18 years was to be weighed carefully keeping in mind the interest of the girls. The mental process that a girl underwent during the transfer should also be considered and prima facie, the Court observed that it would then be the responsibility of the State Government to make such a facility available.
The Court also directed various Government departments like the CWC, Women and Child Development Department etc., to make the data available to the Amicus Curiae who would prepare a detailed petition by using that basic data and the said petition must be filed on or before 11-7-2025.
[High Court of Bombay v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2563, decided on 25-6-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Satyajeet S. Bora, Advocate (Amicus Curiae)
For the Respondents: A.R. Kale, A.P.P.
Thankyou so much sir and mam 🙏