#minor protection

Bombay High Court reinforces that the presence of minor girls in a brothel triggers an irrebuttable presumption of offence under Section 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. The ruling limits the scope of revisional jurisdiction in cases involving heinous offences against minors, setting a strict precedent for human trafficking prosecutions.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court granted bail in a POCSO case where the prosecutrix admitted to a consensual relationship and subsequent marriage, emphasizing the absence of threat or influence post-marriage. The ruling establishes that bail may be justified where the victim's statement undermines the prosecution's case and no evidence tampering risk exists, setting a precedent for evaluating consent and marriage as mitigating factors in POCSO bail applications.

Allahabad HC ruled that consent of a minor victim under the POCSO Act does not bar bail if prima facie evidence suggests a mutual relationship. The court emphasized that bail decisions must be based on evidence assessment, not merely the gravity of the offense, setting a precedent for similar cases.

Bombay High Court grants bail in POCSO case but clarifies that minor's consent is legally void, even in consensual relationships. Key bail conditions outlined.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that the State must proactively refer minors at risk of forced marriage to the Child Welfare Committee under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. This affirms the State’s duty to protect minors from familial coercion, even when the threat originates from family members.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that coercing a minor into marriage qualifies as 'exploitation' under Section 2(14)(vii) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, mandating immediate production before the Child Welfare Committee. The judgment underscores the state's duty to intervene even in the absence of a formal complaint, prioritizing the minor's best interests over familial objections.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that the state must proactively intervene under the Juvenile Justice Act when a minor is at risk of forced marriage, even without a formal complaint. The Court directed police to produce the minor before the Child Welfare Committee, emphasizing that state duty is triggered by the mere apprehension of harm, reinforcing child protection over procedural formalities.

MP High Court mandates constitution of a Medical Board to assess termination feasibility for minor sexual assault victims under the MTP Act, reinforcing procedural safeguards for reproductive rights. The ruling underscores the court's role in ensuring timely medical and legal intervention for vulnerable minors.

Punjab & Haryana HC affirms that minors threatened with forced marriage fall under 'child in need of care and protection' under Section 2(14) of the JJ Act 2015, mandating Child Welfare Committee intervention. The ruling reinforces state duty to protect minors' liberty under Article 21, even without a criminal complaint.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that statutory safeguards under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, must prevail over constitutional protection claims for live-in couples if the petitioner's age is disputed. Authorities must verify age and refer cases to the Child Welfare Committee before granting relief, ensuring minor protection is not compromised under Article 21.

Rajasthan High Court disposed of a habeas corpus petition after confirming the illegal detention of a minor girl in Delhi, directing police authorities to immediately hand her over to her parents. The ruling underscores the state’s duty to protect minors’ fundamental rights under Article 21 and ensures accountability for unlawful custody.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that live-in relationships involving minors cannot claim protection under Article 21, as child protection laws like POCSO and the Juvenile Justice Act override personal autonomy. The Court directed the minor to be produced before the Child Welfare Committee, reinforcing statutory safeguards over constitutional claims in such cases.