SURESHWAR THAKUR ,J.

1. Minors, namely, Rahul, Bhagwan Dass, and, Rajesh, are the legitimate offsprings of the petitioner. The minor boys, Rahul, and, Bhagwan Dass are inmated at Snehalaya, Maloya, whereas, the minor girl Rajesh, is boarded at Ashiana, Sector-15, Chandigarh.

2. Therefore, the petitoner, the legitimate father of the above, has accessed this Court, and, asks for the making of a writ of habeas corpus, upon, the respondents concerned, to release them, from the above place(s), where they are kept at the instance of co-respondent No. 4.

3. The father of the minors, has a valid right to ask for the retrieval to his custody, of his above minor children, but the keeping of the minor children at the above respective places, at the instance of co-respondent No. 4, cannot be construed to be illegal. The above reason becomes founded, upon, the contentions raised in paragraphs 2 to 5, of the reply on affidavit, furnished to the instant petition, paras whereof are extracted hereinafter.

“2. That the deponent states that on 1.4.2022, Operation Muskan -VII was launched in U.T. Area for awareness and as such, awareness camps had been organised and children were sensitised about human trafficking, child labour and other child related issues. Also, steps had been taken for the rescue of children under child begging and child labour category.

3. That the deponent states that a rescue team consisting of officials of Anti Human Trafficking Unit and Women and Child Helpline (181) found these three children namely Rahul age 4 years, Bhagwan Dass age 11 years and a girl namely Rajesh Kumari age 8 years son and daughter of Pabudan who is resident of Jhuggi near Mullanpur Bridge Punjab, begging at Plaza Sector 17 Chandigarh without any family members or any attendant with them. Besides this, one girl child namely Aayena D/o Sultan was also rescued under the child begging category from there.

4. That the deponent states that the three children along with another girl child Aayena D/o Sultan as per their condition and having been found begging, were the children in need of care and protection within the frame work of the provisions of the Juveniile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “2015 Act”). In the situation and circumstances in which the aforementioned children were found required the said children to be rescued and also were within the definition of “child in need of care and protection” under the provision the 2015 Act.

5. That the deponent states that accordingly, in this regard DDR No. 37 dated 1.4.2022 was registered in Police Station, Sector 17, Chandigarh and the medical of said children was conducted at Government Multi Speciality Hospital Sector 16, Chandigarh. After completion of their respective quarantine periods, they were produced as per provisions of Section 31 of the 2015 Act before the Child Welfare Committee Maloya, Chandigarh (CWC-constituted under Section 27 of the 2015 Act).”

4. A perusal of the hereinabove extracted paragraphs, reveals that the minor children were indulging in child begging, and, that their parents were abetting the above act. Therefore, it is imminently clear, that the takings to beggings by the minor children, were purportedlly at the instigation of their parents. Consequently, the above misdemeanours, makes them to become construed as “children in need of care and protection”, rather within the ambit of the definition assigned to the phrase “children in need of care and protection”, as occurs in Section 2 (14) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, provisions whereof, becomes extracted hereinafter.

(14) “child in need of care and protection” means a child—

(i) who is found without any home or settled place of abode and without any ostensible means of subsistence; or

(ii) who is found working in contravention of labour laws for the time being in force or is found begging, or living on the street; or

x x x x x

5. Therefore, the inmating of the children at the present places of their abode, and, at the instance of respondent No. 4, cannot be construed to be visiting any breaches, upon, any right of their father, the petitioner herein, rather to assume their lawful custody. Contrarily the inmating of the minor children at the respective places (supra), rather becomes statutorily completely protected, as, it becomes imbued with a holistic purpose of weaning them from indulging in any misdemeanor, to ensure their upkeep besides to educate them, which otherwise may not have become purveyed to them, given the prima facie indigence of their parents.

6. Be that as it may, this Court while functionally discharging its duty, as “parens patriae” towards the minor children, has to balance the strivings of their parents to retrieve them to their custody, with the imperative necessities of their welfare, and, care givings, rather being ensured to become meted to them by their parents. However, the father of the minor children, who appeared in person, before this Court, could not produce before this Court, any evidence in respect of his financial empowerments, and, obviously he cannot be assumed, to be befitting enough, hence provide the best care givings to the fullest extent, to his minor children, who are still at a tender age, and, require theirs being provided nutritious diet as well require that their needs for education become satiated.

7. However, yet the children are not to be deprived of theirs being bestowed with parental love, and, affection, as the above bestowments are also imperatively necessary, for the grooming of their personalities, besides for not making them orphans, despite their parents being yet alive, irrespective of the financial indigence of their parents. To ensure that the minor children receive parental love, and, affection, and, also are groomed under their parenting, and, besides to rid, all the ill effects of the financial distresses besetting their parents, in sequel whereof, they may become yet driven to become street wanderers, resultantly it becomes the bounden duty of this Court, to, while functionally discharging its duty as “parens patriae” towards them, and, in respect whereof also it becomes incumbent, upon, the Union Territory, Chandigarh, rather to ensure that their educational needs, and, their needs towards nutritious diet, obviously at/on a settled abode, rather all become fully bestowed, upon them. Conspicuously, when their right to receive free education, especially in the wake of the indigence of their parents, is, an essential component of the fundamental right of life enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as, unless the grooming of their personality(ies) becomes assured through theirs being given free education, thereupon(s) the afore right, would remain merely a mirage or an illusion.

8. In the above regard, this Court has received, the able assistance of the learned counsel for the U.T., who has placed on record, the Standard Operating Procedure ('SOP' for short), as, drawn by the Government of India. The relevant portion thereof, appertaining to the extant conditions, of the children, inasmuch as their being wanderers on the streets, without any permanent abode, hence leading them to take to begging, is encapsulated in clause (2), at page 8, clause whereof becomes extracted hereinafter.

“2. Children stay on the streets in the day and are back home in the night with their families who reside in a nearby slum/hutments: These are children who spend their time on street, loitering in the day time. However, they go home during the night to be with their parents who live in a nearby slum or hutment. These children may be found simply loitering, begging, picking rags or selling goods/items. This set of children lacks parental guidance, as their parents too are struggling for their own survival.

9. In the backdrop of the distressing conditions besetting the minor children, there is a well contemplated beneficent measure, carried in page 13, of the SOP, relevant clause (1) whereof becomes extracted hereinafter.

“1. If the child is found to be living with his family on the street and it is a migrant family which has come to the city due to lack of means for subsistence, adopting the livelihood option of doing odd jobs, begging or selling products on the streets, or even does some other work involving children or not, but attracts the provisions provided under JJ Act, 2015 mentioned above, the DCPU may visit the family and prepare the SIR to present the family situation. It is also important that the family is counselled by DCPU/CWO/social worker/NGO/community-based organization (CBO) representative to explain to them the various reasons why the child should not be on the streets. If the family doesn’t find any possible means of being in the city except on the street and they want to go back to their native place, considering the safety of the child and dignity of the family, all possible steps may be taken to rehabilitate the family to their native place. Therefore, keeping in mind the best interests of the child, CWC may consider writing to the CWC of the concerned district the family belongs to, or to the District Magistrate, to provide sponsorship for the child - if the child is eligible for sponsorship under Section 45 of the JJ Act and ensure basic facility and appropriate benefits under various schemes of the Government (both Central and State Government as listed in Section 9 – Table – 12-A & 12-B) are provided to the family so that the family does not put their children at risk. For successful rehabilitation, the following steps may also be ensured:

(i) at the native place, the Village Level Child Protection Committee (VLCPC), with the panchayat, should also help the family to access the benefits under the Government schemes;

(ii) VLCPC/school management committee (SMC)/local body should ensure that the child is enrolled in Anganwadi or school; and

(iii) CWC may assign or request a local NGO/CBO for further support to the child, as per need, and to carry out family strengthening programme (the details of scheme are provided in Annexure)..

x x x x”

10. Consequently, in the backdrop of the above socially beneficent SOP, drawn by the Govt. of India, this Court proceeds to make a direction, in tandem therewith upon co-respondent No. 2, to make at their end the promptest compliances thereto, and, to thereafters also ensure the makings of implementations thereofs, even at the end of their respective counterparts in the State of Rajasthan, of which State, the petitioner is a native. Therefore, even if the present petitioner, intends to shift from Chandigarh, to the apposite location of, his place of birth at Rajasthan, where he obviously would be also without any permanent dwelling, as only if he did hold a permanent abode there, he would take shift to Chandigarh, and, lead here a street wanderer's life. In sequel, yet co-respondent No. 2 is directed to ensure, that the above extracted mandate in the SOP becomes ensured to become complied with, by the local Child Welfare committee concerned, holding jurisdiction over the area, where the petitioner along with his family, chooses to make a permanent home,

11. Moreover, respondent No. 2 is also directed to ensure, through also bearing all the requisite costs, towards the travelling of the petitioner along with his family to his birth place, that they safely reaches there. In addition, for mitigating, the distressing circumstances facing the petitioner, and, his family, this Court directs the respondents to ensure, though yet beyond, the ambit of the alleviative proposals, carried in the above extracted portion of the SOP, rather conspicuously for enlivening, and, also making purposeful the fundamental right to life, that within the schemes as formulated by the Govt. of India, in respect of providing of dwelling houses, suitable to the petitioner, and, that too, also within the shortest period of time, rather becoming so provided, to the petitioner, rather in or around his native place, so that they become inmated thereins. Moreover, if some time is likely to be consumed in providing to the petitioner, and, his family, a hutment or a dwelling abode, thereupon, the respondents concerned, are directed to ensure, that in the relevant interregnum or thereupto, the petitioner, and, his family shall become boarded in the quarters of the Central Government, located in the native area of the petitioner, and, that too, without asking for any charges, from them, in respect thereof. In addition, in the relevant above interregnum(s), all the expenses towards their diet, and, incidental thereto expenses, shall be borne by the respondents concerned, and/or through their counterparts in the State of Rajasthan, and, appertaining to the stay of the petitioner in the quarters of Central Govt., in the area close, to the native place of the petitioner.

12. The petition is accordingly disposed of.