Criminal Law amendment Act 2018

http://www.prsindia.org/uploads/media/Criminal%20Law%202018/Criminal%20Law%20(A)%20Act,%202018.pdf

 Lok Sabha has passed the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill 2018 that proposes to enhance punishment for rape of a child. The Bill provides for death penalty as the maximum punishment in cases of rape of a child under 12. The Bill seeks to replace the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance promulgated on April 21 following an outcry over the rape and murder of a minor girl in Kathua in Jammu and Kashmir and the rape of another woman at Unnao in Uttar Pradesh.

Responding to the passage of the Bill in the Lok Sabha on July 30, Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiren Rijiju said that the POSCO was gender-neutral while the new law pertains to girls specifically. The Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill 2018 will amend relevant Sections of the IPC, CrPC and also POCSO Act.

Print Page

Custody of girl child should be kept with mother: Bombay High Court

"The custody of a female child should be allowed to remain with her mother so that she could be looked after properly," observed Bombay high court while rejecting a man's petition seeking permanent custody of his daughter.

A division bench of justices VA Naik and AM Badar of the Nagpur bench of HC recently dismissed the appeal filed by a man, a teacher of Nagar Parishad High School in Katol, who challenged the family court's order refusing to grant him his daughter's custody in August 2013.

The HC observed that the family court had rightly dismissed the husband's custody petition. The couple married in June 2005 and their daughter was born on March 23, 2006. Due to disputes, the two got divorced.

Print Page

Whether Girl child can be sent children's Home if she is not willing to go to house of her parents?

 Now the crucial question is whether the corpus can be given to
the  custody  of  petitioner.  On  more  than  one  occasion  this  Court
interviewed  the  corpus  and  the  parents.  The  corpus  is  presently
adamant and is not willing to go with parents at any cost. It is reported
that earlier also she left the parents without information which created
a  havoc  to  the  parents.  In  this  factual  backdrop,  the  question  is
whether this Court should forcibly give custody to the parents.
18. The Madras High Court (Full Bench) in T. Sivakumar's case
(supra) opined that if minor girl expresses her desire not to go with her
parents the Court may order her to be kept in a Children Home etc. It
is also noteworthy that a minor girl between her 15 to 18 years of age
floats into a state of puberty, a state of innocence and yet lacking in
mature understanding more guided by “attractions”. The state of mind
can hardly be described as mature. If that be not so, she can hardly
leave her parents for a new entrant in her life, without being mindful of
what the type of such new entrant in the life is.
19. In this factual backdrop, I do not deem it proper to forcibly
handover the corpus to the petitioner/parents. This may cause more
harm than good. 
In this view of the matter, I deem it proper to issue following                                                                                               
directions:-
(i) The  Incharge  of  Nari  Niketan  Centre  shall  give
sympathetical, compassionate and educative treatment to the corpus
with a view to provide her room to come out of the crisis and distress.
(ii) The official respondents shall ensure that the corpus is
given counselling by trained persons on regular basis, atleast once in
a week. It will be the choice of the official respondents to provide
counselling  either  at  Nari  Niketan  Centre  or  take  the  corpus  to
'Parivaar Paramarsh Kendra' in adequate security.
(iii) After four weeks and on completion of four counsellings,
the status would be reassessed by this Court.

                                                                                              
HIGH COURT OF  MADHYA PRADESH 
BENCH AT GWALIOR
 SINGLE BENCH: 
HON. SHRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
WRIT PETITION  NO. 4683/2012 (habeas corpus)
Manohar Jatav vs.State of Madhya Pradesh
and others

(26/07/2012)

Print Page