IndiasHellHoles2013 PDF

Indias Hell Holes:
Child Sexual Assault in Juvenile Justice Homes
Asian Centre For Human Rights

Indias Hell Holes:
Asian Centre For Human Rights

Indias Hell Holes:
Published by:
Asian Centre for Human Rights
C-3/441-C, Janakpuri, New Delhi 110058 INDIA
Tel/Fax: +91 11 25620583, 25503624
Website: www.achrweb.org
Email: suhaschakma@achrweb.org
First published March 2013
Asian Centre for Human Rights, 2013
No part of this publication can be reproduced or transmitted in any form or

by any means without prior permission of the publisher.
ISBN : 978-81-88987-32-0
Suggested contribution Rs. 295/-
Acknowledgement: This report is being published as a part of

the ACHRs National Campaign for Prevention of Violence
Against Children in Conflict with the Law in India - a project
funded by the European Commission under the European
Instrument for Human Rights and Democracy the European Unions
programme that aims to promote and support human rights and democracy
worldwide. The views expressed are of the Asian Centre for Human Rights,
and not of the European Commission.
Indias Hell Holes: Child Sexual Assault in Juvenile Justice Homes
Contents
Abbreviations...........................................................................................................v
Glossary..................................................................................................................vi
1. Executive Summary and Recommendations.......................................................1
2. Indias hell holes: Sexual assaults in juvenile justice homes.................................7
2.1. Child sexual abuse in India ........................................................................7
2.2. Juvenile justice homes.................................................................................7
2.3. Emblematic cases of child sexual assaults in juvenile justice homes............11
Case 1: Repeated sexual abuse of two minor girls by
Manager of Baba Deep Jyoti Anath Ashram in Sambalpur, Odisha...........12
Case 2: Torture and sexual assault on girl inmates at Bethel Children
Home in Durg, Chhattisgarh....................................................................13
Case 3: Physical and sexual abuse of orphan girls at
Jai Anand Nirashrit Ashram, Nashik, Maharashtra....................................13
Case 4: Sodomy and physical assault by senior inmates at
Kuldabad Juvenile Home, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh.................................13
Case 5: Boy sodomised by guard and senior inmates at
Govt-run Ashiana Home for Boys, Alipur in Delhi ..................................14
Case 6: Illegal detention, sexual abuse and starvation of girls at
illegal shelter homes, Jaipur, Rajasthan......................................................14
Case 7: Sexual abuse of a minor girl by Manager of a
childcare home in Delhi............................................................................15
Case 8: Rape of minor girl at Swami Gnanananda
Ashram orphanage, Andhra Pradesh ........................................................15
Case 9: Sexual and physical abuse at juvenile home, Kottayam, Kerala......15
Case 10: Sexual abuse of 10 girls by Secretary of Peralassery
Yatheemkhana (Orphanage), Chakkarakkal, Kerala....................................16
Case 11: Boy sodomised by inmates and staff at
Govt.-run shelter home for children, Goa..................................................16
Case 12: Sexual abuse by senior inmates at
Govt. Shelter Home, Jalpaiguri, West Bengal............................................16
Case 13: Sexual abuse of girls at Sarbabhowmik Sishu
Ananta Ashram orphanage, Rourkela in Orissa.........................................16
Case 14: Sexual abuse of girls at a destitute home at
Vasanthapuram, Tamil Nadu.....................................................................17
Case 15: Sexual abuse by staff of NGO-run orphanage in
Gurgaon, Haryana....................................................................................17
Case 16: Sexual and physical abuse of girls at Bal Kunj,
a Govt-run shelter home in Yamunanagar, Haryana . ................................17
Case 17: Apna Ghar case, Rothak in Haryana...........................................18
Case 18: Sexual abuse of at least seven girls by guard at
Rajikiya Shishu Grih, Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh.....................................20
Case 19: Juveniles fled due to torture, sexual abuse and ill-treatment
at Govt. Observation Home for Boys, Mathura in Uttar Pradesh..............21
Case 20: Torture and sexual abuse of minors at Church
of Christ Home Orphanage in Bangalore in Karnataka.............................22
Case 21: Sodomy by senior inmates at Umeed Aman Ghar
Children Home, Delhi..............................................................................22
ACHR iii
Case 22: Sexual abuse of HIV positive children by the Manager

NGO Drone Foundation, Gurgaon, Haryana...........................................22
Case 23: Arya Orphanage Case in Daryaganj, Delhi..................................23
Case 24: Mentally challenged girl raped by CRPF personnel
at Sai Vikas Home and School for Mentally Retarded in
Warangal, Andhra Pradesh........................................................................24
Case 25: Minor girl raped and impregnated at
Vidyavati Ashram, Pune, Maharashtra......................................................24
Case 26: 9-year-old girl repeatedly raped by senior inmates
at a destitute home in Bandra, Maharashtra...............................................24
Case 27: Sexual abuse of girls at Elsadi Jebathottam Orphanage,
Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu........................................................................25
Case 28: Sexual harassment by CWC member during counseling in
Bangalore, Karnataka ...............................................................................25
Case 29: Sexual abuse by founder of Siria Orphanage Home,
Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh.....................................................................25
Case 30: Physical and sexual abuse by caretakers of Pandita
Ramabai Mukti Mission Orphanage in Nerul, Maharashtra.......................26
Case 31: Sodomy, torture and ill-treatment at
Observation Home for Boys, Berhampur, Orissa......................................26
Case 32: Physical and sexual abuse of children by owner of
Arumai Packiam Immanual Shelter Home, Kanyakumari, Tamil Nadu......26
Case 33: Ill-treatment and sexual abuse at Reach Children Home,
Mogappair, Tamil Nadu............................................................................27
Case 34: Repeated rape by gatekeeper forced 15-year-old girl to
run away from an orphanage in Cuttack, Orissa........................................27
Case 35: Death, torture and sexual abuses of physically-challenged
girls at Kalyani Mahila Bal Seva Sanstha, Panvel in Maharashtra................28
Case 36: Official dismissed for sexual abuse of two girls at
children home, Agra in Uttar Pradesh.......................................................29
Case 37: Sexual exploitation of girls at Swami Bal Nath Ashram,
Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.........................................................................29
Case 38: Sexual abuse of three girls in NGO-run destitute home,
Himachal Pradesh.....................................................................................29
Case 39: Repeated sexual abuse of minors by a Class IV employee
at Rajikiya Bal Grih (Shishu), Rampur in Uttar Pradesh...........................29
2.4. Impact of sexual assault: Missing children from juvenile justice homes......30
3. How the Government of India allows protectors to become
predators in the juvenile justice homes?............................................................33
i. Inspection committees not the priority of the Integrated
Child Protection Scheme...........................................................................34
a. Inspection Committees.......................................................................34
b. Integrated Child Protection Scheme ...................................................34
c. PABs record on the Inspection Committees........................................35
ii. Unregistered child care institutions: homes for abuse................................41
iii. Non-functioning of Child Welfare Committees.........................................43
iv. Lack of segregation on the basis of offences, sex and age...........................46
iv ACHR
Abbreviations
ACHR Asian Centre for Human Rights

CBI Central Bureau of Investigation
CCI Child Care Institutes
CRPF Central Reserve Police Force
CSCPR Chhattisgarh State Commission for Protection of Child Rights
CWC Child Welfare Committee
DCPO District Child Protection Officer
DCPS District Child Protection Society
DCPU District Child Protection Unit
DNA Deoxyribonucleic Acid
FIR First Information Report
ICPS Integrated Child Protection Scheme
IPC India Penal Code
JJB Juvenile Justice Board
JJ(C&P)C Act Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act
KSCPCR Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights
MWCD Ministry of Women and Child Development
NCPCR National Commission for Protection of Child Rights
NCRB National Crime Records Bureau
NGO Non-governmental organisation
NHRC National Human Rights Commission
PAB Project Approval Board
POCSO Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
ACHR v
Glossary
Anatha Orphan
Anathalaya Orphanage
Ashram Shelter Home
Bala Mandir Children Home
Chowkidar Watchman
Class-IV employee Lower level employees such as cook, sweeper, gatekeeper, clerk
etc
Duppatta A long multi-purpose scarf worn by women across both

shoulders
Holi A religious festival celebrated by Hindus as a festival of

colours
Randi Prostitute
Rajikiya Government
Samprekshan Grih Observation Home
Shishu greh Children Home
Vaishya Prostitute
Yatheemkhana Orphanage
vi ACHR
1. Executive Summary and Recommendations
Sexual offences against children in India have reached an epidemic proportion and the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) is unlikely to be
able to address the menace unless the Government of India and the State Governments
take effective measures for proper implementation of the same.
A total of 48,338 child rape cases was recorded from 2001 to 2011. These include
7,112 cases in 2011; 5,484 cases in 2010; 5,368 cases in 2009; 5,446 cases in 2008;
5,045 cases in 2007; 4,721 cases during 2006; 4,026 cases during 2005; 3,542 during
2004; 2949 cases during 2003, 2,532 cases during 2002 and 2,113 cases during
2001.1 The registration of cases of child rape have been consistently increasing and
India saw an increase of 336% of child rape cases from 2001 (2,113 cases) to 2011
(7,112 cases). These are only the tip of the iceberg as the large majority of the cases
of child rape are not reported to the police while children regularly become victims of
other forms of sexual assault too.
Many of the child rape cases take place in juvenile justice homes2 i.e. observation
home, special home, or childrens home or shelter home set up, certified or recognized
and registered respectively under sections 8, 9, 34, sub-section (3) of section 34 and
section 37 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act [JJ(C&P)
C Act]. At the end of financial year 2011-2012, about 733 juvenile justice homes in
India had received grants under the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) of the
Ministry of Women and Child Development.
It will not be an understatement to state that juvenile justice homes, established to

provide care and protection as well as re-integration, rehabilitation and restoration
of the juveniles in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection, have
become Indias hell holes where inmates are subjected to sexual assault and exploitation,
torture and ill treatment apart from being forced to live in inhuman conditions. The
girls remain the most vulnerable. It matters little whether the juvenile justice homes
are situated in the capital Delhi or in the mofussil towns.
This report highlights 39 emblematic cases of systematic and often repeated sexual
assault on children in juvenile justice homes. Out of the 39 cases, 11 cases were
reported from government-run juvenile justice homes such as observation homes,
children homes, shelter homes and orphanages, while in one case a CWC member
was accused of sexual harassment during counseling sessions. The remaining 27
cases were reported from privately/NGO run juvenile justice homes such as shelter
homes, orphanages, children homes, destitute homes, etc. Majority of privately/NGO
Please refer to the Annual Reports of the National Crimes Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs
1.
available at www.ncrb.nic.in
Juvenile justice homes mean institutions defined under 2(i) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protec-
2.
tion of Children) Rules, 2007 which states that (i) institution means an observation home, or a special
home, or a childrens home or a shelter home set up, certified or recognized and registered under sections
8, 9, 34, sub-section (3) of section 34 and section 37 of the Act respectively;
ACHR 1
run homes are not registered under Section 34(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act (as amended in 2006) which provides that Without
prejudice to anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, all institutions,
whether State Government run or those run by voluntary organisations for children in need
of care and protection shall, within a period of six months from the date of commencement of
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2006, be registered
under this Act in such manner as may be prescribed.
In the case of government-run juvenile justice homes, the perpetrators were staffs
including the caretakers, security guards, cooks and other Class IV employees, and the
senior inmates. In two cases, the sexual abuses were committed by the senior inmates
in collusion with the staff.
With respect to the privately/NGO-run juvenile justice homes, the perpetrators include
managers/directors/owners/founders and their relatives and friends, staff members such
as caretakers, wardens, cooks, drivers, security guards, gatekeepers, senior inmates and
outsiders including security forces. Out of the 27 cases in privately/NGO-run homes,
inmates were responsible for the offences in five cases and out of these, in one case
offence was committed in collusion with the staff.
In most cases, sexual assault in the juvenile justice homes continues for a long period
as the victims are not able to protest and suffer silently in the absence of any inspection
by the authorities under the JJ(C&PC) Act. While authorities are the main predators,
the absence of separate facilities, in many cases for boys and girls, and in most cases as
per age i.e. for boys and girls up to 12 years, 13-15 years and 16 years and above as
provided under Rule 40 of the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children Rules
2007 facilitates sexual assault on the minor inmates by the senior inmates.
The sexual assault on children the juvenile justice homes continues unabated as the
Government of India i.e. the Ministry of Women and Child Development and the
State Governments have failed to implement the JJ(C&PC)Act in letter and spirit.
It failed to address four critical areas indispensable for addressing child sexual abuse
in juvenile justice institutions i.e. functional Inspection Committees, registration of
all juvenile justice homes, effective and functional Child Welfare Committees and
separation of inmates on the basis of the nature of the offences, sex and age.
i. Inspection Committees
Most State governments have not formed Inspection Committees which are mandated
to inspect the juvenile justice homes under the JJ(C&P) Act as provided under Section
65 of the JJ(C&PC) Act. Rule 63 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Rules, 2007 mandates the Inspection Committees to visit and oversee the
conditions in the institutions and appropriateness of the processes for safety, well being and
permanence, review the standards of care and protection being followed by the institutions, look
out for any incidence of violation of child rights, look into the functioning of the Management
Committee and Childrens Committee at least once in every three months.
2 ACHR
The Ministry of Women and Child Development itself has repeatedly failed to raise
the need for establishment of the Inspection Committees while approving projects
for all the States and Union Territories under the Integrated Child Protection Scheme
(ICPS). The Project Approval Board (PAB) of the ICPS indeed never raised the
issue of inspection Committees with a number of state governments despite holding
discussions for approval of grants since 2010. The PAB never raised the issue of
Inspection Committees with the Governments of Delhi, Chhattisgarh, Puducherry,
Bihar, Jharkhand, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, Meghalaya and Nagaland despite having
yearly meetings for approval of grants since 2010. The PAB failed to give the same
importance to the Inspection Committees as given to the Child Welfare Committees
and the Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs), thereby failing to address child sexual abuse in
juvenile justice homes. In fact, no separate budgetary allocation has been made under
ICPS for the functioning of the Inspection Committees. There is a conscious effort on
the part of the Ministry to avoid the issue of the Inspection Committees.
ii. Unregistered child care institutions

There are hundreds of unregistered child care homes across the country, which are
not registered under Section 34(3) of the JJ (C&PC) Act, 2000. Inspection is seldom
carried out in these unregistered homes and children remain extremely vulnerable to
sexual abuse in these homes. These cases of sexual assault at two children homes at
Mansarovar and Jagatpura in Jaipur, Rajasthan from where 51 children, mostly girls,
were rescued on 12 March 2013;3 the Arya Anathalaya, an orphanage in Daryaganj,
Delhi,4 the NGO-run orphanage, Supurna ka Aangan in Gurgaon, Haryana,5 and
Sarbabhoutika Anatha Sishu Ashram Orphanage in Rourkela, Odisha cited in this
report were not registered under the JJ(C&PC) Act.
Non-registration of the juvenile homes remains a massive problem. The Ministry of
Women and Child Development had raised the issue of non-registration of childrens
home with Jharkhand on 21 January 2013, Odisha on 9 November 2012, Arunachal
Pradesh on 29 August 2012, Haryana on 29 August 2012, Rajasthan on 29 August
2012, Andhra Pradesh on 11 July 2012, Assam on 11 July 2012, Mizoram on 15 March
2012, Karnataka on 28 June 2012 and Kerala 17 January 2012, among others.
There is no punitive provision per se for non-registration of the institutions. However,
Section 23 of the JJ(C&PC) Act clearly provides that Whoever, having the actual
charge of, or control over, a juvenile or the child, assaults, abandons, exposes or wilfully neglects
the juvenile or causes or procures him to be assaulted, abandoned, exposed or neglected in a
manner likely to cause such juvenile or the child unnecessary mental or physical suffering shall
be punishable with imprisonment for a team which may extend to six months, or fine, or with
both. It is clear that appropriate action can be taken by the authorities under Section
23 following inspection.
3.
Illegal Jaipur shelter owner accused of abusing 2 girls, The Indian Express, 30 March 2013
4.
Government-appointed administrator to look into orphanages functioning, The Hindustan Times, 12
February 2012
5.
Indo-Asian News Service, 5 May 2012, available at: http://www.sify.com/news/gurgaon-ngo-didn-t-
have-permission-to-run-orphanage-news-national-mffwueijaja.html
ACHR 3
iii. Non-functional Child Welfare Committees

Though there are 462 District Child Welfare Committees in 23 States mandated to
verify fit institutions, majority of them exist only on paper. In a few cases, the State
Governments have been restricting surprise inspections by the CWCs. The State
Government of Karnataka while appointing the CWC members in October 2010 put
the conditions that members cannot visit child care institutions, when they are not
holding a sitting, without prior permission of the heads of these institutions. This
effectively prohibits random and surprise inspections which is essential for the CWC
to certify whether the institutions are fit as per the JJ(C&PC) Act.
Even in cases where there are no such restrictions, the functioning of the existing
CWCs has been found wanting. On 16 April 2012, the Allahabad High Court while
hearing the matter of sexual abuse at Rajikiya Shishu Grih, Allahabad observed as
under6:
The Court must also express its disappointment that the Child Welfare Committees
consisting mainly of Social Workers which have been constituted under the Juvenile
Justice Act (2000) [JJ Act] for attending to the welfare of children, have shown little
proactive sensitivity for addressing the myriad problems relating to children, but have
simply been passing orders in a mechanical and bureaucratic manner, with no sense
of mission and thus have given little relief to children in distress.
iv. Lack of segregation on the basis of nature of offences, sex and age
Recognising vulnerability of younger inmates, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection
of Children) Rules 2007 underscored the need of classification and separation of the
children on the basis of the nature of the offences, age and sex. Rule 40 provides for
separate facilities between for boys and girls as well as according to age i.e. for boys
and girls up to 12 years, 13-15 years and 16 years and above.
This provision has not been complied with and the recommendation of the PAB on
the rationalization of the homes failed to address this particular issue. The lack of
segregation on the basis of the nature of offences, age and sex facilitates senior inmates
to commit the offences against minor inmates including girls.
Conclusion and recommendations

Child sexual abuse in juvenile justice institutions is rampant, systematic and has
reached an epidemic proportion. Hundreds of children especially girls go missing
from the juvenile justice homes either to escape from the abuses and/or being victims
of trafficking. In Karnataka, as many as 1,089 children below 14 years have gone
missing from 34 Bala Mandirs (Childrens Homes) during February 2005 to February
2011.7 In July 2012, the Calcutta High Court ordered a probe by the Central Bureau
of Investigation into the alleged disappearance of 40 girls from a West Bengal
Available at: http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do

6.
1,089 children missing from bala mandirs in last five years, The Hindu, 28 August 2011
7.
4 ACHR
government-run home and another run by an NGO. The directive was passed after
the Criminal Investigative Department of the West Bengal Police failed to trace the
girls who went missing from the homes. According to the petition, 13 minor girls
went missing from a home run by an NGO near Kolkata on 29 October 2009 while
27 from a government run children home in West Midnapore between 12 November
2009 and 18 March 2010.8
In order to address increasing sexual offences against children, on 19th June 2012,
the President of India gave assent to the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act, 2012 (POCSO) to codify sexual assault, provide procedures for investigation and
establishment of the Special Courts to try the offences. The Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Rules, 2012 came into force on 12th November 2012.
Oblivious to the systematic sexual assaults in the juvenile justice homes, Section 19(5)
of the POCSO provides that Where the Special Juvenile Police Unit or local is satisfied
that the child against whom an offence has been committed is in need of care and protection,
then, it shall, after recording the reasons in writing, make immediate arrangement to give
him such care and protection (including admitting the child into shelter home or to the
nearest hospital) within twenty-four hours of the report. Section 19(6) of POCSO further
provides that The Special Juvenile Police Unit or local police shall, without unnecessary delay
but within a period of twenty-four hours, report the matter to the Child Welfare Committee
and the Special Court or where no Special Court has been designated, to the Court of Session,
including need of the child for care and protection and steps taken in this regard.
The mandatory requirement of registration of all child care institutions within six
months from the date of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act of
2006 came into force has failed to bring an end to child sexual abuses in the juvenile
justice homes whether run by the government or the NGOs with the funding from the
Government of India under the Integrated Child Protection Programme.
The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is also unlikely to be able
to address the menace of child sexual abuse unless the Government of India and the
State Governments take effective measures for proper implementation of the same.
Asian Centre for Human Rights recommends the following:
To Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India to:

Ensure establishment of the Inspection Committees in all the districts and
mandatory inspection of the juvenile justice homes by the Committees in every
three months as provided under Rule 63 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Rules, 2007;
Ensure that the status of the Inspection Committees as a separate agenda item
in the Project Approval Board meeting of the Integrated Child Protection
Scheme and separate budgetary allocation is made for proper functioning of the
Inspection Committees;
West Bengal: 40 girls disappear from govt-run home, The Indian Express, 20 July 2012
8.
ACHR 5
Issue direction to the effect that no funds are to be given to any juvenile justice
homes whether run by the State Governments or NGOs unless the latest
quarterly report of the Inspection Committees is submitted for consideration of
further grants;
Issue necessary guidelines to ensure that Inspection Committees or Child
Welfare Committees or any other authorities during their inspection provide an
atmosphere where the inmates could give their opinion about the status of the
homes or their situations to the inspecting team without fear of retribution or
punishment by the staff which therefore requires conducting interviews without
the presence of any staff of the juvenile home and the Inspection Committees
mandatorily inquire about sexual assault and the same is reflected in the
Inspection Reports;
Amend the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act of 2000 to
introduce a new chapter on monitoring of juvenile justice homes after holding
consultation with all the stakeholders;
Instruct all the state governments to transfer the staff posted in the Juvenile
Justice Homes at regular period with a view to rule out vested interests and
possible criminal nexus;
Instruct all the State governments to ensure that no male staff is posted in the
juvenile justice homes for girls;
Take measures under the ICPS to implement Rule 40 which provides that
the State Governments or the voluntary organisation recognised by that State
Government shall set up separate observation homes or special homes for boys
and girls; and (2) the observation homes or special homes shall set up separate
residential facilities for boys and girls up to 12 years, 13-15 years and 16 years
and above;
Direct the State government to conduct a survey of the unregistered homes to
be completed within six months and register cases against the authorities of the
unregistered juvenile justice homes for any violations of the Section 23 of the
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act;
Create a Special Fund under the Integrated Child Protection Scheme to provide
financial assistance for prosecution of the offenders under the POCSO; and
Provide adequate financial and human resources to the National Commission for
Protection of Child Rights and the State Commissions for Protection of Child
Rights for implementation of the role assigned under Rule 6 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Rules relating to Monitoring of implementation
of the Act.
Suhas Chakma
Director
6 ACHR
2. Indias hell holes: Sexual assaults in juvenile

justice homes
2.1. Child sexual abuse in India

Children face all forms of sexual assault in India and offences against children have
reached an epidemic proportion. The number of child rape cases registered is indicative
of sexual assault against the children.
A total of 48,338 child rape cases was recorded from 2001 to 2011. These include
7,112 cases in 2011; 5,484 cases in 2010; 5,368 cases in 2009; 5,446 cases in 2008;
5,045 cases in 2007; 4,721 cases during 2006; 4,026 cases during 2005; 3,542 during
2004; 2,949 cases during 2003, 2,532 cases during 2002 and 2,113 cases during
2001.9 The cases of child rape have been consistently increasing and India saw an
increase of 336% of child rape cases from 2001 (2,113 cases) to 2011 (7,112 cases).
These are just the tip of the iceberg as the large majority of the cases of child rape are
not reported to the police while children regularly become victims of other forms of
sexual assault too.
Among the states, Madhya Pradesh recorded the highest number of rape cases with
9,465 cases from 2011 to 2011; followed by Maharashtra with 6,868 cases; Uttar
Pradesh with 5,949 cases; Andhra Pradesh with 3,977 cases; Chhattisgarh with 3,688
cases; Delhi with 2,909 cases; Rajasthan with 2,776 cases; Kerala with 2,101 cases;
Tamil Nadu with 1,486 cases; Haryana with 1,081 cases; Punjab with 1,068 cases;
Gujarat with 999 cases; West Bengal with 744 cases; Odisha with 736 cases; Karnataka
with 719 cases; Himachal Pradesh with 571 cases; Bihar with 519 cases; Tripura with
457 cases; Meghalaya with 452 cases; Assam with 316 cases; Jharkhand with 218
cases; Mizoram with 217 cases; Goa with 194 cases; Uttarakhand with 152 cases;
Chandigarh with 135 cases; Sikkim with 113 cases; Manipur with 98 cases; Arunachal
Pradesh with 93 cases; Jammu and Kashmir with 69 cases; Andanam and Nicobar
Island with 65 cases; Puducherry with 41 cases; Nagaland with 38 cases; Dadra and
Nagar Haveli with 15 cases; and Daman and Diu with 9 cases. Lakswadeep recorded
no rape cases during 2001-2011.10
The detail State-wise information of the child rape cases reported to NCRB from
2001 to 2011 is given in Table 1.
2.2. Juvenile justice homes

The Government of India enacted the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2000 and one of the aims of the Act is .. to consolidate and amend the
law relating to juveniles in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection, by
Refer to the Annual Reports of the National Crimes Records Bureau available at www.ncrb.nic.in
9.
Crime in India reports from 2001-2011, National Crime Records Bureau

10.
ACHR 7
8
Table 1: State-wise information of the child rape cases reported to NCRB from 2001 to 2011
States 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total
Madhya Pradesh 390 517 699 710 870 829 1043 892 1071 1182 1262 9465
Maharashtra 367 491 605 634 634 655 615 690 612 747 818 6868
Uttar Pradesh 562 416 301 394 394 347 471 900 625 451 1088 5949
Andhra Pradesh 84 137 383 363 315 412 363 412 416 446 646 3977
Chhattisgarh 150 182 186 308 382 448 368 411 394 382 477 3688
Delhi 113 138 140 186 235 448 398 301 307 304 339 2909
Rajasthan 35 38 49 137 246 311 406 420 371 369 394 2776
Kerala 64 186 69 159 140 219 183 215 235 208 423 2101
Tamil Nadu 20 29 47 166 115 125 141 187 182 203 271 1486
Haryana 108 84 77 24 131 176 122 70 116 107 66 1081
Punjab 38 52 54 54 51 58 135 106 210 144 166 1068
Gujarat 39 67 75 96 90 112 98 99 91 102 130 999
West Bengal 12 16 16 19 6 20 92 129 109 73 252 744
Odisha 17 21 55 31 28 101 92 65 87 74 165 736

Karnataka 11 19 25 42 48 84 84 97 104 108 97 719
Himachal Pradesh 35 26 36 32 58 41 48 68 83 72 72 571
Bihar 16 3 3 3 8 17 110 91 63 114 91 519
ACHR
States 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total
ACHR
Tripura 0 0 0 28 20 37 33 104 83 107 45 457
Meghalaya 0 16 24 22 51 47 41 34 60 91 66 452
Assam 0 3 5 7 90 61 34 27 10 39 40 316
Jharkhand 11 43 16 43 22 28 23 8 8 0 16 218
Mizoram 0 2 9 0 0 35 60 18 11 42 40 217
Goa 10 7 22 20 15 14 15 18 30 23 20 194
Uttarakhand 9 8 11 17 18 23 17 9 7 10 23 152
Chandigarh 8 6 9 13 21 8 8 10 21 16 15 135
Sikkim 4 4 8 1 14 14 17 12 14 14 11 113
Manipur 0 0 7 4 4 15 4 22 12 11 19 98
Arunachal Pradesh 0 3 9 11 10 0 1 11 16 12 20 93
Jammu & Kashmir 6 7 2 4 4 8 12 5 4 8 9 69
A& N Islands 0 1 2 8 2 5 3 8 12 15 9 65
Puducherry 4 4 1 4 3 8 3 4 1 3 6 41
Nagaland 0 6 0 1 0 11 2 0 0 3 15 38
Dadra & Nagar Haveli 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 2 3 1 15
Daman & Diu 0 0 4 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 9
Lakswadeep 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 2113 2532 2949 3542 4026 4721 5045 5446 5368 5484 7112 48338
9
providing for proper care, protection and treatment by catering to their development needs,
and by adopting a child-friendly approach in the adjudication and disposition of matters in
the best interest of children and for their ultimate rehabilitation through various institutions
established under this enactment.
With this in mind, the JJ(C&PC) Act provides for establishment, management and
regulation of different categories of juvenile homes for reception and reformation of
juveniles in conflict with the law as well as to provide shelter to children in need of
care and protection. These include (i) Observation homes under Section 8, (ii) Special
homes under section 9, (iii) Childrens homes under section 34, and (iv) Shelter
homes under section 37.
The JJ(C&PC) Act also empowers the State Government to certify any institution
other than the one established by the government as a fit institution (i) for the
temporary reception of juvenile in conflict with law (Observation homes) during the
pendency of any inquiry regarding them under section 8(2); (ii) Special homes for
reception and rehabilitation of juvenile in conflict with law under section 9(2); (iii)
Childrens homes for the reception of child in need of care and protection during
the pendency of any inquiry and subsequently for their care, treatment, education,
training, development and rehabilitation under section 34(2); and (iv) Shelter homes
for the children in the need of urgent support under section 37(2).
Rule 2(i) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 states
that institution means an observation home, or a special home, or a childrens home
or a shelter home set up, certified or recognized and registered under sections 8, 9, 34,
sub-section (3) of section 34 and section 37 of the Act respectively.
As per the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India, a total
of 733 juvenile justice homes received assistance under the Integrated Child Protection
Scheme by the end of financial year 2011-2012.
Table 2: List of the Juvenile Justice Homes which received assistance from the
Ministry of Women and Child Development
Sl No Name of the State Number of Homes

1. Andhra Pradesh 108
2. Arunachal Pradesh 1
3. Assam 10
4. Bihar 14
5. Chhattisgarh 12
6. Delhi 25
7. Dadra and Nagar Haveli 1
8. Gujarat 13
10 ACHR
9. Haryana 10
10. Himachal Pradesh 22
11. Jharkhand 16
12. Karnataka 52
13. Kerala 28
14. Madhya Pradesh 24
15. Maharashtra 91
16. Manipur 13
17. Meghalaya 18
18. Mizoram 4
19. Nagaland 12
20. Odisha 27
21. Puducherry 21
22. Rajasthan 35
23. Sikkim 5
24. Tamil Nadu 44
25. Tripura 11
26. Uttar Pradesh 61
27. West Bengal 55
Total 733
2.3. Emblematic cases of child sexual assaults in juvenile justice homes

Many of the child rape cases take place in juvenile justice homes i.e. observation home,
special home, or childrens home or shelter home set up, certified or recognized and
registered under respectively sections 8, 9, 34, sub-section (3) of section 34 and section
37 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act [JJ(C&P)C Act]. It
will not be an understatement to conclude that juvenile justice homes, mandated to
provide care and protection as well as re-socialisation, rehabilitation and restoration
of the juveniles in conflict with law, have become Indias hell holes where inmates i.e.
children are subjected to sexual assault and exploitation, torture and ill treatment apart
from being forced to live in inhuman conditions. The girls remain at the highest risk
of assault and abuse. It matters little whether the juvenile justice homes are situated in
the capital Delhi or in the mofussil towns.
This report highlights 39 emblematic cases of systematic and often repeated sexual
assault on children in juvenile justice homes. Out of the 39 cases, 11 cases were
reported from government-run juvenile justice homes such as observation homes,
children homes, shelter homes and orphanages, while in one case a CWC member
ACHR 11
was accused of sexual harassment during counseling sessions. The remaining 27

cases were reported from privately/NGO run juvenile justice homes such as shelter
homes, orphanages, children homes, destitute homes, etc. Majority of privately/NGO
run homes are not registered under Section 34(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2006.
In the case of government-run juvenile justice homes, the perpetrators were staffs
including the caretakers, security guards, cooks and other Class IV employees and the
senior inmates. In two cases, the sexual abuses were committed by the senior inmates
in collusion with the staff.
With respect to the privately/NGO-run juvenile justice homes, the perpetrators include
managers/directors/owners/founders and their relatives and friends, staff members such
as caretakers, wardens, cooks, drivers, security guards, gatekeepers, senior inmates and
outsiders including security forces . Out of the 27 cases in privately/NGO-run homes,
inmates were responsible for the offences in five cases and out of these, in one case
offence was committed in collusion with the staff.
In most cases, sexual assault in the juvenile justice homes continue for long period as
the victims are not able to protest and suffer silently in the absence of any inspection
by the authorities under the JJ(C&PC) Act. While authorities of the juvenile justice
homes are the main predators, the absence of separate facilities in many cases for boys
and girls and in most cases as per age i.e. for boys and girls up to 12 years, 13-15 years
and 16 years and above as provided under Rule 40 of the Juvenile Justice Care and
Protection of Children Rules 2007 facilitates sexual assaults on the minor inmates by
the senior inmates.
Case 1: Repeated sexual abuse of two minor girls by Manager of Baba Deep
Jyoti Anath Ashram in Sambalpur, Odisha
On 3 April 2013, Upendra Das (40), Manager of Baba Deep Jyoti Anath Ashram,
an orphanage at Naxapali in Sambalpur, Odisha was arrested by police for allegedly
sexually abusing two minor girls of the orphanage for the last two months. The
accused was arrested after some girl inmates of the orphanage confided about the
sexual abuse of the girls to one Manas Barik, who teaches the inmates voluntarily.
In turn, the teacher informed the Chairperson of the Child Welfare Committee who
asked the District Collector to take action on the matter. The District Collector and
the police raided the orphanage on the night on 2 April 2013. There were 20 inmates -
16 girls and four boys - aged between 1 and 14 years in the orphanage. All the inmates
were shifted to Rukmani Lath Bal Niketan at Chachhanpali following a direction of
the District Collector. Two among the girls, who were studying in class V and VII
respectively, alleged that they had been sexually abused repeatedly by Upendra Das for
about two months. A case was registered.11
Orphanage staff arrested for sexually abusing inmates, The New Indian Express, 4 April 2013
11.
12 ACHR
Case 2: Torture and sexual assault on girl inmates at Bethel Children Home in
Durg, Chhattisgarh
On 26 March 2013, four girl inmates ran away from Bethel Children Home in
Titrudih area in Durg district of Chhattisgarh. They were rescued by volunteers of
Childline NGO who helped them file a police complaint. The girls claimed that they
were not given food, and instead they were beaten and sexually abused.12 On 30
March 2013, the police arrested Director of the Home, B Nadulu and Warden J Dilip
Kumar. Following the revelation an inspection was conducted by Chhattisgarh State
Commission for Protection (CSCPR) of Child Rights and Women and Child Welfare
Department, which confirmed the allegations. During the inspection some of the boy
inmates also complained of sexual abuse. About 47 children, including 17 girls, were
staying at the privately run children home. Four of the girls who escaped from the
home were shifted to a children home at Mana in Raipur while the rest were being
kept at a state- run children home in Durg.13
Case 3: Physical and sexual abuse of orphan girls at Jai Anand Nirashrit Ashram,
Nashik, Maharashtra
In March 2013, girl inmates of Jai Anand Nirashrit Ashram, an orphanage situated
at Chamar Leni area in Nasik, Maharashtra sent letters to Child Welfare Committee
and Childline alleging physical and sexual abuse by the officials of the orphanage. In
their complaint letters, the victims alleged that Superintendent Bhausaheb Thorat,
Caretakers Santosh Thorat and Harshad Patil, and Security Guard Bhalerao had been
physically and sexually abusing them for years. The inmates revealed in the letters that
whenever they were taken to a doctors clinic, the accompanying caretakers would stop
the vehicle in isolated areas and sexually abuse them. The letter also stated that the
accused would touch their private parts, made to bend over and touch their toes for
hours as punishment for small mistakes, and when visitors came to the orphanage, the
caretakers would stand behind them and pinch them so that they do not complain to
the outsiders about the abuse. On 24 March 2013, Child Welfare Committee and the
Department of Women and Child Development visited the orphanage for investigation.
The orphanage, recognized by the Department of Women and Child Development,
Maharashtra housed 35 girls and 63 boys. However, there were no female staff other
than the cooks who come for few hours every day to prepare meals.14
Case 4: Sodomy and physical assault by senior inmates at Kuldabad Juvenile

Home, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh
On 19 March 2013, a 17-year-old juvenile (name withheld) in conflict with law
complained before a magistrate during inspection of the Juvenile Home, Kuldabad in
Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh that he was sodomised and beaten by fellow inmates over
the past several days. An inquiry was conducted by the staff and local police following
Chhattisgarh: Warden, head of child shelter booked for sexually assaulting girls, IBN Live, 31 March 2013,
12.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/chhattisgarh-child-shelter-warden-head-booked-for-sexual-abuse/382169-3-
235.html
13.
Raipur: Director, Warden of Private Shelter Held for Sodomy, Outlook India, 30 March 2013
14.
Orphans allege sexual abuse at Nashik home, The Mumbai Mirror, 25 March 2013
ACHR 13
the complaint. The investigation found the allegations against the nine inmates were
true. Thereafter, the police registered a case under Section 377, 374, 332, 323 and 405
of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act.15
Case 5: Boy sodomised by guard and senior inmates at Govt-run Ashiana Home
for Boys, Alipur in Delhi
On 13 March 2013, Delhi Police informed the Delhi High Court that the security
guard of a government-run children home, Ashiana Home for Boys in Alipur, Delhi
was removed from the job after a seven-year-old HIV positive boy alleged that he
was sexually abused by the security guard and other older inmates. The security guard
identified as Amandeep use to beat up the children with stick regularly. The boy also
alleged that three older inmates had sexually abused him and used to harass him
daily.16
Case 6: Illegal detention, sexual abuse and starvation of girls at illegal shelter
homes, Jaipur, Rajasthan
On 12 March 2013, 51 children, including 27 girls and 24 boys, were rescued from
two children homes at Mansarovar and Jagatpura in Jaipur in Rajasthan. The minors
were illegally confined under appalling conditions for years in the two homes which
were illegally run by one Jacob John from Kerala. Of the 51 children rescued from two
children homes 21 were from Manipur, six each from Nagaland and Uttar Pradesh,
four each from Assam, Nepal, Rajasthan and Punjab and two from Delhi. The children
were rescued by the Rajasthan State Commission for Protection of Child Rights
(RSCPCR) along with social workers, activists and media. The girls were found in a
dreadful state. The homes were filthy, the food was full of fungus and the toilets were
dirty. The children were kept locked in the two homes. Some of the girls had lesions
on their skin and at least one of them had developed rickets due to non-exposure to
sunlight. Hundreds of liquor bottles were also recovered from both the homes.17
Most of the minors were from the North East and have forgotten their mother tongue.
The children were brought to the homes on the pretext of providing free and quality
education. Jacob John reportedly used to sleep in one of the girls rooms and had given
different new names to the 51 children. The children alleged that they were starved for
days. Jacob John, running the children homes by flouting every norm and guideline,
was arrested.18
Out of the 27 girls, two of them, including a 17-year-old girl from Nagaland accused
Pastor Jacob John of sexually abusing them during counseling sessions. The victim
9 juveniles booked for sodomy, The Times of India, 20 March 2013

15.
Security guard of Ashiana children home sacked: Delhi govt to HC, Zee News, 13 March 2013,
16.
http://zeenews.india.com/news/delhi/security-guard-of-ashiana-children-home-sacked-delhi-govt-to-
hc_835210.html
17.
51 children rescued from Jaipur shelters, The Hindustan Times, 14 March 2013
18.
Rescued children subjected to sexual abuse? Available at: http://e-pao.net/GP.asp?src=24..220313.
mar13
14 ACHR
from Nagaland alleged that she was repeatedly raped since she was 11 years while
another rescued girl alleged she was molested. Some of the children also recalled other
teenaged girls who lived in the home earlier were forced to sleep with Jacob John at
night. The whereabouts of these girls could not be ascertained as no records were
maintained.19
Case 7: Sexual abuse of a minor girl by Manager of a childcare home in Delhi

In March 2013, Ibrahim, (58 years)20, manager of a childcare home at Samaypur
Badli, Outer Delhi, was arrested on the charge of sexually abusing a minor girl and
subjecting her to child labour. An NGO, which had sent the girl to the care centre,
conducted a surprise visit and found that the child was living at the residence of the
centres manager. Thereafter the NGO representatives took custody of the girl and
informed the police. After medical examination, the child was sent to another care
home. On 18 March 2013, the girl was produced before the Child Welfare Committee.
She alleged that the manager had kept her in his house for the past one year and had
also raped her. The CWC ordered police to register a case against the manager.21
Case 8: Rape of minor girl at Swami Gnanananda Ashram orphanage, Andhra

Pradesh
On 28 October 2012, police registered a case against 52-year old Swami Poornananda,
Director of Swami Gnanananda Ashram, an orphanage and old-age home, in the Port
City of Vishakapatnam, Andhra Pradesh on the charge of rape of a minor girl in the
orphanage. The police registered a case under Section 376 of Criminal Procedure
Code based on the complaint filed by the 13-year-old victim and her parents. The
victim told the police that she was raped three months ago. Members of a tribal
students association also alleged that the accused had sexually assaulted other inmates
of the orphanage.22
Case 9: Sexual and physical abuse at juvenile home, Kottayam, Kerala

In October 2012, children lodged at Juvenile Home, Thiruvanjoor in Kottayam
District, Kerala alleged before a television channel that they were subjected to sexual
and physical abuse by the caretakers of the Home. There were 65 inmates in the
juvenile home set up under the Social Welfare Department of the State Government.
The victims alleged that they were asked to undress and do obscene things. If they did
not follow the orders, they were beaten and threatened. In September 2012, some
staff were taken into police custody for beating up a girl, but were released within few
days. The state government of Kerala had ordered an inquiry into the allegations.23
19.
Manager of child home held for rape, The Times of India, 20 March 2013
20.
21.
Delhi playschool owners husband held sexually abusing 5-year-old girl, The Indian Express, 20 March
2013
22.
Swami arrested for raping minor girl in ashram, The Indian Express, 29 October 2012
23.
Children allegedly sexually abused by caretakers at Kerala juvenile home: NDTV: 11 October, 2012:http://
www.ndtv.com/article/south/children-allegedly-sexually-abused-by-caretakers-at-kerala-juvenile-home-
278085
ACHR 15
Case 10: Sexual abuse of 10 girls by Secretary of Peralassery Yatheemkhana

(Orphanage), Chakkarakkal, Kerala
On 24 September 2012, A. P. Ahamed (43), Secretary of the Peralassery Yatheemkhana
(orphanage) at Chakkarakkal, Kerala was arrested on the charge of sexually abusing
at least 10 minor girls at the orphanage. The arrest was made after the police received
complaints from at least 10 minor girls alleging sexual and psychological abuse. On 25
September 2012, Ms. Kunhamina (40), who had worked as warden in the orphanage
was also arrested. The orphanage, established in 1991, was housing 42 boys and 22
girls in age group of 10-15 years. The girls of the orphanage were shifted to a child
care facility at Thalassery.24
Case 11: Boy sodomised by inmates and staff at Govt.-run shelter home for
children, Goa
On 29 September 2012, the police registered a case of sodomy against four inmates
and two staff members of a State-run shelter home for children for sexually assaulting
a minor boy inmate (10 years). In his complaint to the police, the victim alleged that
during his two months stay at the Home he was sexually assaulted several times by the
accused. But no action was taken by the concerned officials. The victim first filed the
complaint against all the accused before the Child Welfare Committee who directed
the police to register a case.25
Case 12: Sexual abuse by senior inmates at Govt. Shelter Home, Jalpaiguri, West
Bengal
On 28 September 2012, two inmates (13 and 14 years respectively) of a government-
run shelter home for boys in Jalpaiguri District, West Bengal were sexually assaulted
by two senior inmates. The victims were admitted to Jalpaiguri District Hospital with
injuries. The shelter home houses juveniles as well as orphans.26
Case 13: Sexual abuse of girls at Sarbabhowmik Sishu Ananta Ashram orphanage,
Rourkela in Orissa
On 19 August 2012, Deepak Bal, Manager of Sarbabhowmik Sishu Ananta Ashram,
an orphanage at Basanti Colony in Rourkela, Orissa was arrested on charges of sexual
abuse of girl inmates. According to police, out of the 90 inmates, 10 girls had accused
the Manager of sexual abuse. Medical examination of the victims confirmed the abuses.
The inmates were shifted to other institutions following an inspection by the Child
Welfare Committee.27 The orphanage was not registered under the JJ(C&P)C Act.28
Sexual abuse of girls at orphanage: two arrested, The Hindu, 26 September 2012
24.
10-yr-old boy at Goa shelter home allegedly sexually assaulted: Hindustan Times; 29 September 2012:
25.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Goa/10-yr-old-boy-at-Goa-shelter-home-allegedly-sexual-
ly-assaulted/Article1-937555.aspx
26. Teens sexually assaulted by homosexuals at West Bengal govt shelter: The Indian Express; 28 Septem-
ber: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/teens-sexually-assaulted-by-homosexuals-at-west-bengal-govt-
shelter/1009330
27.
Assault in orphanage, The Telegraph, 20 August 2012
28.
83 orphans shifted from errant Rourkela home, The Times of India, 22 August 2012
16 ACHR
Case 14: Sexual abuse at a destitute home at Vasanthapuram, Tamil Nadu

On 21 June 2012, a minor girl, an inmate of the Joy Karunai Illam, a destitute home
at Vasanthapuram in Namakkal town of Tamil Nadu, ran away from the home and was
found wandering at a bus terminus by a lady teacher. When she was taken to the local
police station the girl told them about sexual assault perpetrated on her by G. Jani, son
of Caretaker George Gnanasekaran in May 2012. The victim remained silent as the
Caretaker and his family members had threatened her. Following the revelation, the
authorities closed down the home after an inquiry by District Child Protection Officer
(DCPO) and Child Welfare Committee. The DCPO stated that some of the girls
revealed that they were subjected to sexual harassment at the home and the Caretaker
and his family covered up the incidents and threatened them of dire consequences if
they complained. Later, some of the inmates were handed over to their parents, while
some were shifted to another home.29
Case 15: Sexual abuse of girls by staff of NGO-run orphanage in Gurgaon,

Haryana
On 6 May 2012, the owner and caretaker of NGO-run orphanage, Suparna ka Aangan
in Gurgaon, Haryana were arrested and sent to judicial custody for alleged rape and
sexual abuse of minor girl inmates. Rachit Raju (20), the caretaker-cum cook was
arrested on the charge of rape of the minor girls, while the owner identified as Suparna
Sethi was arrested for violation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2000 as the orphanage was not registered. On 5 May 2012, a team of NCPCR
inspected the orphanage on a complaint filed by NGO Shakti Vahini. There were 20
inmates lodged in the orphanage. Police suspected that the owner may be aware of the
sexual abuse of the girls by the Caretaker.30 At least five girls between 8-15 years were
sexually abused by the accused.31
Case 16: Sexual and physical abuse of girls at Bal Kunj, a Govt-run shelter home
in Yamunanagar, Haryana
On 31 May 2012, a girl inmate went missing from the Bal Kunj, a government-run
shelter home in Chhachhrauli block in Yamunanagar district, Haryana. Media reports
alleged that children of the shelter home had been subjected to sexual, mental and
physical exploitation by the caretakers. The state government ordered a probe by the
Haryana State Council for Child Welfare (HSCCW) into the allegation of sexual abuse
of the inmates of the shelter home.32 The national daily, The Tribune had reported
that the senior girls were stripped and subjected to beating by the caretaker.33 Further,
29.
TN: Childrens home shut after plaints of sexual abuse, The New Indian Express, 25 September 2012,
available at: http://newindianexpress.com/cities/chennai/article600361.ece
30.
Orphanage owner, caretaker arrested for sexual abuse of girls: IBNLive News; 6 May 2012: http://ibnlive.
in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/orphanage-owner-caretaker-arrested-for-sexual-abuse-of-girls/995254.
html
31.
32.
HSCCW team to probe shelter home sexual abuse charges, The Hindustan Times, 5 June 2012
33.
NIGHTMARE HOMES, The Tribune, 29 July 2012
ACHR 17
a 17-year-old mentally retarded girl inmate who allegedly ran away from the shelter
home was gang raped by two youths on 1 June 2012. Doctors confirmed that the girl
was raped.34
Case 17: Apna Ghar case, Rothak in Haryana

In the first week of May 2012, three girls escaped from Apna Ghar shelter home
in Rohtak, Haryana and revealed the tales of sexual abuses, torture, ill-treatment at
the shelter home run by the NGO Bharat Vikas Sangh. On 9 May 2012, a team
of NCPCR conducted a surprise inspection following which more shocking tales of
torture, sexual abuse and exploitation, child labour, etc emerged. Some female inmates
of the home had even alleged that the in-charge, Jaswanti Devi, had forced some of the
girls from the home into immoral activities. The NCPCR team also found that some
inmates were missing from the home. The NGO in-charge had reportedly given these
children away to childless couples from other states. The NCPCR rescued about 120
inmates including children, girls and women. The state government of Haryana sealed
the Apna Ghar shelter home in June 2012.35
The NCPCR team revealed shocking findings. The NCPCR team noticed the
following living conditions as revealed by the inmates:
The children were not allowed to venture out of the Home and were treated as
captive all the time.
Medical attention was provided by a private doctor who would not write a
prescription, but just give the medicine. ADC cross checked with the doctor
referred by the Director Jaswanti who denied that Jaswanti would ever bring
children to him for treatment.
Children were forced to live together with the mentally challenged women,
where as they needed to be segregated as this had a definite bearing on the
psyche of the children.
Most of the children were malnourished as they were not provided with the
proper dietary requirements. Unless a special day, the evening meals consisted of
Dalia with high water content barely enough to feed a growing child in his/her
developmental stage.
For the newly born babies the mothers were forced to beg Director Jaswanti for
the milk and at times even on begging it would be denied as a part of punishment
even for a flimsy mistake by the mother.
On occasions as a part of punishment, children were forced to go hungry for 2-3
days even for most minor mistakes committed unwittingly. And sometimes the
punishment would be extended to all the children even as old as 4-5 years.
The sexually abused six girls transferred from Drone Foundation Gurgaon to
Naaz Foundation Delhi and again after re-transfer to Haryana, they were finally
Shelter home inmate gang-raped, another missing, The Times of India, 7 June 2012
34.
Rohtak shelter home sealed after at least 100 women and children allege sexual, physical abuse, NDTV,
35.
9 June 2012, http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/rohtak-shelter-home-sealed-after-at-least-100-women-

and-children-allege-sexual-physical-abuse-229317
18 ACHR
sent to Apna Ghar Rohtak revealed that even in this home they were subjected
to harsh abuse and have been forced to engage only in cleaning and sweeping
without any one caring for their dietary requirements. Out of these, 4 girls
were HIV positive, and their medical record was not properly maintained in the
Home.
The NCPCR team further noted the following with regard to Abuses, its forms and
other irregular acts committed by the Director, her daughter, her son-in-law and the
driver as reported by the children
The most frequent form used by Director Jaswanti was the abusive, obscene
and vulgar language used, which at times was even shameful for the children to
repeat.
Calling names like Randi, Vaishya and sexually abusive terminology.
Physically beating of children and even adolescent girls by the Director Jaswanti,
her daughter Sushma@Simmi and Jai Bhagwan on the slightest of pretext of
committing a mistake or refusal obey orders even if vulgar and not acceptable to
girls.
Even the boys were not spared of thrashings and spankings by the trio on the
slightest of pretext of committing a mistake or refusal to obey orders.
Forcing the girls to disrobe and lie in a naked condition overnight. Sometimes
the girls would be tied to the grilled fencing with the duppatta for even two to
three days and beating them with iron rods & wooden sticks;
On slightest pretext of indiscipline making the children go without food and
water for day ranging 1 to 3;
Forcing two girls to lay in a naked condition in a locked room and subjecting
them to engage in a lesbian act in presence of the Director Jaswanti who derived
a special satisfaction out of the act and in case of a refusal to do so hitting
their private parts with wooden rolling pins, scissors etc. which would result in
bleeding at times.
Using the children as domestic helps and sending them to her own home, home
of her daughter and others without any remunerations;
Forcing the children to work in agricultural fields (a good number of sickles have
been reportedly found in the premises by the police)
Sexual molesting of girls by Mr. Jaibhagwan, reportedly the son-in-law of the
owner of the Home;
Girls with good looks were sent to weddings to serve as waitress or even to
perform. Tips earned would be snatched away by the director.
Abandoning mentally challenged women from the Home in trains / bus stops in
the middle of night with accomplice driver Satish Ahlawat.
Allegedly selling / giving away of babies / infants in adoption without the
consent of biological mothers or even following norms for adoption of destitute/
orphaned children;
ACHR 19
Reportedly restoring children to mothers/relatives without any specific orders

from CWC and without conducting any Inquiry as required under section 33 of
the JJ Act, 2000.
On the occasion of Holi the children were intoxicated by Jaswanti and Sushma@
Simmi resulting in a child falling sick.
As a part of punishment unleashed on a child committing a grave mistake of
demanding more food some amenities, child was forced to clean all the utensils
for entire week or sweep the entire floor with a wet cloth.
Cooking was normally entrusted to elder children of Apna Ghar, adolescents
and the adult inmates of Swadhar Shelter Home.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court appointed a Committee to investigate the case.
The Committee apprehended that if the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) did
not take over the case evidence might be destroyed as Jaswanti Devi was an influential
person with links among political and police brass. The officials of Haryana Police
have been accused of exploitation of the inmates of the Apna Ghar. The CBI had taken
charge of the investigation on 13 July 2013.36 On 28 March 2013, the Punjab and
Haryana High Court directed the CBI to complete the probe within two months.37
Case 18: Sexual abuse of at least seven girls by guard at Rajikiya Shishu Grih,
Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh
On 5 April 2012, Vidya Bhushan Ojha, a contract chowkidar at Rajikiya Shishu
Grih, Allahabad, an orphanage run by the Social Welfare Department, Uttar Pradesh
was arrested on the charge of rape of at least three girl inmates, including a mentally
challenged one. The orphanage houses girls below 10 years. Vidya Bhushan Ojha had
been subjecting the victims to physical and mental trauma for past couple of years.
He had threatened them of dire consequences if they dared to disclose the matter. The
trauma that these girls were undergoing came to light when one of the victims was
adopted by a childless couple, who found blood stains in the underwear of the victim.
The Allahabad High Court took sou moto cognizance after the incident was reported
in a news report.
Following pressure, the state government on 5 April 2012 ordered a magisterial enquiry.
The Magisterial Enquiry Report dated 8 April 2012 revealed a shocking picture where
the main accused Vidya Shankar Ojha was found committing acts of sexual abuse with
minor girls aged 6 to 10 years for the past several years in the Shivkuti Shishu Grih.
The report also stated that other employees including superintendents, house mothers,
cook, Class 4 workers such as helpers, nurses, nursery teachers and sweepers had either
facilitated (or at least overlooked) the immoral acts of Ojha, sometimes even after
being eye witnesses of the ghastly crime.
CBI takes up probe in Apna Ghar shelter house case, Zee News, 13 July 2012, http://zeenews.india.com/
36.
news/haryana/cbi-takes-up-probe-in-apna-ghar-shelter-house-case_787302.html
Apna Ghar sexual abuse: HC tells CBI to complete probe in two months, The Indian Express, 29 March
37.
2013
20 ACHR
Ojha had been indulging in these misdeeds for several years after his appointment
as a chowkidar in the adoption unit of the home for 6 months in 2006. The report
found sexual abuse of seven girl-child inmates by Vidya Bhushan Ojha. Apart from
the sexual assault, Ojha forced the inmates to broom, sweep, cook and clean the toilet,
and on their failure to perform their tasks, he would beat them. However, no action
was taken against Ojha. The Magisterial Enquiry Report also indicted the previous
superintendent Suman Srivastava.38
Case 19: Juveniles fled due to torture, sexual abuse and ill-treatment at Govt.
Observation Home for Boys, Mathura in Uttar Pradesh
On 17 February 2012, eight inmates fled the home following a scuffle with the staff.
The inmates were allegedly beaten up by the staff. On 7 June 2012, a team of NCPCR
visited the Rajkiya Bal Samprekshan Grih (Kishore), the Observation Home for Boys
in Mathura and found the condition utterly dismal. The inmates had to cook, wash
clothes and clean the place all by themselves. The inmates were subjected to physical
and sexual abuse by the staff. The staff told the visiting NCPCR team that two of the
inmates returned to the home on their own. However, NCPCR team found that the
two inmates had been so grievously injured that they had to be rushed to hospital.
The staff also told the NCPCR team that the inmates who had fled the home seriously
injured the staff. The NCPCR team, however, observed That some young children
were able to so grievously injure the staff seemed to be an incredulous account prima
facedly. Accordingly, the team asked for the medical reports of all the personnel who
had been injured and also the FIR they had filed along with a detailed report of the
incident.
The children were subjected to physical and sexual abuse by the Caretaker O. P. Yadav.
During a pervious visit, the NCPCR had recommended that the caretaker must be
removed from his post. However, no action was taken against him. Finally, an FIR was
registered against O. P. Yadav after the NCPCR team once again brought the matter
before the District Administration during the visit in June 2012.
The NCPCR team also found that police fetched the children with uniforms and the
children were bound by rope by the police while being taken away. Incidentally, a
NCPCR team had visited the Home on 7 June 2011 and, among others, recommended
that police should not enter the home in uniform and not to handcuff the children.
However, none of the recommendations were implemented.
The NCPCR also enquired about the death of 11-year-old inmate who died due to lack
of timely medical attention. The inmate had suffered an injury but he was not transferred
to hospital despite the visiting doctor had insisted on his hospitalization.39
Criminal Writ-Public Interest Litigation No.4207 of 2012, 16 April 2012, Allahabad High Court, Avail-
38.
able at: http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do

NCPCR Inquiry Report on Atrocities on Juveniles and the death of the 11 year old in Rajkiya Bal
39.
Samprekshan Grih (Kishor), Mathura, inspection of Rajkiya Bal Grih (Shishu) and Rajkiya Bhikshuk
Grih and review of Child Rights in Mathura, http://www.ncpcr.gov.in/Reports/NCPCR%20report%20
on%20child%20right%20violations%20in%20Mathura%20Final.pdf
ACHR 21
Case 20: Torture and sexual abuse of minors at Church of Christ Home
Orphanage in Bangalore in Karnataka
On 28 February 2012, 42 children, including 23 girls and 19 boys, aged between
six and 17 years, were rescued by a team of State Child Rights Commission, Child
Welfare Committee, Childline Bangalore and police from Church of Christ Home, an
orphanage in Challaghatta, Bangalore in Karnataka following complaints of physical
and sexual abuse. The Manager of the orphanage identified as Charles and another
person John Williams were arrested. The team found marks of torture on the children
who were in traumatic conditions. The home was registered as a society but not
registered either with the Child Welfare Committee or the Department of Women and
Child Development as an orphanage.40 The team also found canes which were used
for beating the children. The victims alleged that they were often sexually abused by
Charles. One minor girl also allegedly died in the home. However, the accused covered
up the death of the child.41
Case 21: Sodomy by senior inmates at Umeed Aman Ghar Children Home,
Delhi
In February 2012, three boys were sexually abused by senior inmates at Umeed Aman
Ghar in Mehrauli, South Delhi. The police confirmed sexual abuse of the three minors
after an investigation. Two of the boys were sodomised, while the third was forced
into unnatural activities. The abuse came to light in the first week of July 2012 when
a former employee of Umeed Aman Ghar lodged a complaint with the Child Welfare
Committee. The former employee alleged that three inmates were being sexually
abused by older boys, but no action was taken against them. The complainant further
claimed that it was not the first case of sexual abuse at the home and that the victims
were not counseled after the incident.42
Case 22: Sexual abuse of HIV positive children by the Manager of NGO Drone
Foundation, Gurgaon, Haryana
On 15 January 2012, a team of the National Commission for Protection of Child
Rights (NCPCR) raided the Drone Foundation, an NGO which run a childcare
centre for HIV positive children, in Gurgaon, Haryana following complaint of sexual
abuse of two girls. The team rescued 14 HIV positive children, including eight girls.
The Manager of the NGO, Drone Foundation, was accused of sexually abusing the
children for a long time.43 The police booked the NGO caretaker and board member
Ankur Gupta on charges of rape and his mother for conspiracy. An FIR was filed
under Sections 376/376C/376F/120B/506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 23
of the JJ(C&P)C Act.44
42 children rescued from orphanage, Deccan Herald, 29 February 2012

40.
Blore shamed by abuse; 41 kids rescued from city orphanage: Oneindia News; 1 March, 2012: http://
41.
news.oneindia.in/2012/03/01/blore-shamed-with-abuse-41-kids-rescued-from-orphanage.html
42.
Police probe confirms abuse at Mehrauli children home, The Hindustan Times, 7 August 2012
43.
14 HIV positive children rescued from NGO, The Hindustan Times, 18 January 2012
44. Discarded by society, they were easy prey for predator, The Hindustan Times, 19 January 2012
22 ACHR
Case 23: Arya Orphanage Case in Daryaganj, Delhi

On 24 December 2011, an 11-year-old girl inmate at Arya Anathalaya, an orphanage
in Darya Ganj, Delhi died after she was admitted to Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan
Hospital after she complained of vomiting. The post-mortem report revealed that
the girl had been subjected to repeated sexual abuse.45 A security guard identified as
Navrattan was arrested for sexually assaulting the girl and a 14-year-old boy inmate of
the orphanage was also apprehended on the charges of rape and physical assault.46
According to the Haq Centre for Child Rights, which was engaged by Delhi Police
to assist the probe, rape and physical assault on the deceased was not an isolated case
as the 14-year-old accused allegedly confessed to sodomising five other boys. The
investigation report by the Haq Centre for Child Rights, which was based on personal
interviews and interaction with children of Arya Orphanage stated that older inmates
and the staff members subjected a number of boys and girls to physical abuse and
sexual assault.47 The report further stated that children were paraded before outsiders
while the male inmates and staff had free access to the female section.48 According to
the police, the management of the Arya Orphanage knew about the cases but they had
not lodged a complaint.49The Arya orphanage is not registered under the JJ(C&P)
C Act, yet the Government had not been able to take any legal action against the
management.50 In the aftermath of the Arya Orphanage sexual abuse case the Child
Welfare Committee had recommended that the Delhi Government must ensure that
all the children institutions run by the organisation get themselves registered under
the JJ(C&P)C Act.51Amidst more allegations of sexual abuses, the Delhi government
appointed a senior officer of the department of women and child development as
administrator of the orphanage to look after the regular administration and take
steps to prevent further exploitation of 1,600-odd boys and girls living in the private
childrens home.52
In his statement to the Child Welfare Committee, the 12-year-old boy who earlier
accused a 14-year-old inmate of sodomizing him also alleged that he was physically
abused by one of his teacher wardens too.53 On 15 February 2012, a bench headed
by Acting Chief Justice A K Sikri and Justice R S Endlaw of the Delhi High Court
directed the newly appointed administrator of Arya Anathalaya to look into the alleged
incidents of sexual abuse and harassment of children inside the orphanage.54
45.
13-year-old in net for girls death
46.
Orphanage guard held for raping 11-yr-old girl, The Hindustan Times, 18 February 2012
47.
Abuse tales in orphanage, The Hindustan Times, 11 February 2012, Deccan Herald, 17 February 2012
48.
HT FOLLOW-UP - ARYA ORPHANAGES HORROR STORIES - Children were paraded before
outsiders: Report, The Hindustan Times, 12 February 2012
49.
12-year-old dies after rape at orphanage, boy arrested, The Indian Express, 11 February 2012
50.
February 2012
51.
Orphanage not even registered under Juvenile Justice Act, The Hindu, 13 February 2012
52.
GOVT APPOINTS ADMINISTRATOR TO MANAGE CHILDREN HOME, The Hindustan Times,
14 February 2012
53.
Warden too abused kids, The Hindustan Times, 15 February 2012
54.
COURT ORDERS ORPHANAGE ABUSE PROBE, The Hindustan Times, 16 February 2012
ACHR 23
On 18 February 2012, police arrested the Chief Warden of the Arya Orphanage
Surinder Singh Chauhan and Ramesh Maurya, a warden of the boys hostel on
the charges of negligence.55 On 25 February 2012, the Delhi government set up a
commission of enquiry (CEO) to look into the issues and circumstances related to the
allegations of abuse of children at the Arya Orphanage, an unregistered children home
in Daryaganj.56
Case 24: Mentally challenged girl raped by CRPF personnel at Sai Vikas Home
and School for Mentally Retarded in Warangal, Andhra Pradesh
On 12 November 2011, a mentally challenged, deaf and mute 12-year-old girl, an
inmate of Sai Vikas Home and School for Mentally Retarded, a shelter home located
near a CRPF camp at Bhimaram in Warangal district of Andhra Pradesh, delivered a
stillborn baby. The police had detained three CRPF constables for allegedly raping the
mentally challenged for interrogation. According to the police, the three accused CRPF
constables had been frequently seen in the shelter home. The police further claimed
that the rape might have continued for over seven months. The incident of the sexual
abuse came to light only when the victim was taken to hospital after she complained
of stomach pain. Five other inmates in the shelter home were also suspected to have
been sexually assaulted. The CRPF constables had easy access to the shelter home. The
hostel warden Ms S Satyamma was also made an accused.57
Case 25: Minor girl raped and impregnated at Vidyavati Ashram, Pune,
Maharashtra
In November 2011, a 13-year-old girl inmate of Vidyavati Ashram, a private orphanage
at Kamshet in Pune district, Maharashtra was found pregnant. The girl was already
more than five months pregnant when it was revealed. She was allegedly raped by a
13-year-old inmate of the Ashram. The authorities allegedly failed to take any action
despite being aware of the incident. Following pressure, the superintendent Basavraj S
Chinnamwar and a lady caretaker at the orphanage were suspended for their failure to
detect the rape case.58An NGO, however, demanded that the victim undergo a DNA
test to ascertain whether she was raped by the 13-year-old inmate of the ashram.59
Case 26: 9-year-old girl repeatedly raped by senior inmates at a destitute home
in Bandra, Maharashtra
From 3 March 2011 to early April 2011, a 9-year-old girl was repeatedly raped by
four senior inmates at a Destitute Home under the St Catherine of Siena school run
by a missionary organization in Bandra (West) in Maharashtra. The victim, a student
of 1st standard of St Catherine of Siena School, was an inmate of the Shelter Home
attached to the school. There were about 350 inmates, both boys and girls, who live in
the Home. The incident came to light in April 2011 when the authorities of the shelter
55.
Chief warden, 2 staff of Arya Orphanage held, The Indian Express, 19 February 2012
56.
Panel to probe child abuse case, The Tribune, 26 February 2012
57.
12-yr-old delivers baby, CRPF men detained, The Indian Express, 15 November 2011
58.
13-year-olds rape at orphanage surfaces 5 months later, Mid-Day, 3 November 2011
59.
NGO takes up Vidyavati rape case with WCD Department, Mid-Day, 6 December 2011
24 ACHR
home and school held an interactive session with the inmates. During the session,
every inmate was asked about his or her problems. This was when the victim told
the authorities that she was sexually abused by the four boys in the shelter repeatedly
since 3 March 2011. The victim had suffered trauma by the repeated sexual assaults.
The accused boys, studying in Class III, IV and V respectively, were apprehended and
confessed to have raped the girl.60
Case 27: Sexual abuse of girls at Elsadi Jebathottam Orphanage, Thoothukudi,

Tamil Nadu
In September 2010, a 15-year-old girl, an inmate of Elsadi Jebathottam Orphanage
at Saathankulam in Thoothukudi district of Tamil Nadu was found pregnant after she
was taken to hospital by her relatives. The girl was staying at the orphanage but had
gone to stay at her relatives home after she fell sick. The relatives took her to hospital
where the doctor told that she was pregnant, following which the relatives filed a
complaint with the police. Based on the complaint, the police raided the orphanage
on 24 September 2010 and arrested the owner of the orphanage, Soundararajn (56)
and his sons, Sebastian (26) and Udhayabalan (24). Other children were also allegedly
subjected to sexual abuse. The orphanage housed 34 children including 12 girls hailing
from various places in Tamil Nadu. The police also sealed the orphanage and shifted
the inmates to other children homes.61
Case 28: Sexual harassment by CWC member during counseling in Bangalore,

Karnataka
On 8 September 2010, the State Government issued an order restraining Balakrishna
Masali, a member of the Child Welfare Committee II of the Bangalore Urban district,
from attending sittings of the Child Welfare Committee, after he was found guilty of
molesting girls by the Karnataka State Commission for Protection of Child Rights
(KSCPCR) who were brought before him for enquiry. In its report the KSCPCR
stated that the accused took the advantage of his position and used the opportunity
to sexually molest the minor girls in the privacy of the cubicle and recommended his
suspension and inquiry under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2000 and relevant sections of Indian Penal Code. The KSCPCR held an inquiry
following a complaint by the Association for Promotion of Social Action, an NGO,
alleging that the accused molested a 14 year-old girl during a 30-minute counseling
session. The KSCPCR recorded the statements of four girls including the complainant
lodged in the government-run girls home and the statement of the care-takers of the
home. All the four girls alleged sexual harassment at the hand of the accused.62
Case 29: Sexual abuse by founder of Siria Orphanage Home, Hyderabad,

Andhra Pradesh
On 5 September 2010, the police arrested Malyadri, founder and secretary of Siria
Orphanage Home and School situated at T.V. Colony, Vanasthalipuram in Hyderabad,
ACHR complaint to NCPCR dated 7 April 2011
60.
Orphanage manager, son held for sexually abusing minor, The Times of India, 26 September 2010
61.
Person in charge of child protection turns violator, The Hindu, 9 September 2010
62.
ACHR 25
Andhra Pradesh following a sting operation conducted by a vernacular news channel

on alleged sexual exploitation in the orphanage. The victims who confirmed the
assault informed the police that the accused used to call the inmates to his room in the
orphanage and sexually assaulted them.63 Nearly 130 orphans, both male and female,
live in the orphanage and classes from nursery to standard IX are conducted there.64
Case 30: Physical and sexual abuse by caretakers of Pandita Ramabai Mukti
Mission Orphanage in Nerul, Maharashtra
On 1 September 2011, eight minor girls were rescued by the police after they fled from
Pandita Ramabai Mukti Mission orphanage in Nerul in Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra.
The girls, aged between five and 10 years, fled the home unable to bear physical,
sexual and mental abuse by the caretakers on the night of 31 August 2011. About 12
girls were staying in the ashram, out of which eight ran away. Initially the girls did
not tell about the abuses but later they began to cry and told about their ordeal at the
ashram by the caretakers. The police stated that out of the eight girls, three were the
main targets of the accused and he used to force them to indulge in oral sex, apart from
physical assaults. The girls had to serve food, wash utensils and do all the household
works. The girls further stated that they were undergoing through the ordeal for the
past three years. The remaining four girls were also rescued. The caretakers, Satish Pagi
(45) and his wife Anita (40) were arrested.65
Case 31: Sodomy, torture and ill-treatment at Observation Home for Boys,
Berhampur, Orissa
In September 2010, a researcher of the Asian Center for Human Rights visited the
Government Observation Home, Special Home and Childrens Home (Combined)
for Boys at Berhampur under Ganjam District of Orissa and found consistent, serious
and credible evidence that both the staff and older adult inmates regularly sexually
abused the junior inmates. It was also found that the inmates at the Observation
Home were routinely subjected to acts of violence and sexual abuse. If any inmate
refuses to follow the dictate of the officials, he is subjected to beating and deprived
of food. The younger children in particular suffer treatment that amounts to torture,
and sexual abuse both at the hands of the staff and the senior inmates. The adult/older
inmates work for staff and abuse and intimidate the younger inmates.66
Case 32: Physical and sexual abuse of children by owner of Arumai Packiam
Immanual Shelter Home, Kanyakumari, Tamil Nadu
On 4 July 2010, Childline, Kanyakumari rescued 32 children from Arumai Packiam
Orphanage founder arrested, The Hindu, 13 September 2010

63.
Girls in orphanage suffer sexual abuse, 13 September 2010; available at: http://www.siasat.com/english/
64.
news/girls-orphanage-suffer-sexual-abuse%E2%80%8E
65. Sexually abused minors rescued, Daily News and Analysis, 3 September 2011
66. Orissa: Juveniles Fleeing From Torture and Abuse: A fact-finding report on the fleeing of juveniles from
the Government Observation Home, Special Home and Childrens Home (Combined) for Boys at Ber-
hampur under Ganjam District of Orissa on 21-22 September 2010, Asian center for Human Rights,
available at: http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/JJ-Orissa-012010.pdf
26 ACHR
Immanual, a shelter home in Kanyakumari, Tamil Nadu following a complaint of

physical and sexual abuse of the children by the owner of the orphanage. The owner
of the orphanage was arrested by the police pursuant to an FIR lodged by the Child
Welfare Committee. The children included 14 boys and 18 girls in the age group
of 3 to 14 years. The children were rescued after the mother of an inmate informed
the Childline on 28 June 2010 that 40 children were housed in small rooms and the
owner of the home abused of the children both physically and sexually. The children
confessed to the Childline that the owner physically assaulted and every day two or
three were taken to his house located close to the shelter home and they were compelled
to massage him. One of the girl inmates further informed before the Childline team
that The owner very often hugs them and touches them at places that are sensitive
and if they do not cooperate he assaulted them. Further before a day the children
were rescued, three children came out of the shelter home and complained to the
police unable to bear the torture. Later, the owner went to the police station to bring
back the children and allegedly started beating them all through the police station to
the shelter home. After reaching the home, they were beaten with chairs and hit them
on the walls following which they suffered injuries.67
Case 33: Ill-treatment and sexual abuse at Reach Children Home, Mogappair,
Tamil Nadu
On 21 January 2010, 22 Manipuri children which included 11 girls were rescued
in Chennai, Tamil Nadu after they were found in squalid conditions in a house at
Sholinganallur and in Reach Children Home at Mogappair. As per the report of
the Tamil Nadu Police, the children were not treated well and were made to do the
personal work of the Director of the Reach Children Home and his family members.
Three of the boys were engaged by the Director of the children home in compound
wall construction work in his house at Madhavaram and they were beaten by the son
of the Director when they failed to do the work in the home properly. One of the girls
was asked by the Director to massage his body during night time and was molested.
Two girls were reportedly molested by the son of the Director and one of their relatives
respectively. The rescued children were sent back to Manipur in February 2010 through
the coordinated action of the Tamil Nadu Police, CWC, Chennai, Social Defence
Department of Government of Tamil Nadu and their counterparts in Manipur. The
main person who was accused of exploiting the children was Mr. Immanuel and eight
other accused in the case were arrested, but released on bail.68
Case 34: Repeated rape by gatekeeper forced 15-year-old girl to run away from
an orphanage in Cuttack, Orissa
On 12 August 2009, a 15-year-old inmate of an orphanage in Cuttack city of Orissa ran
away from the orphanage after she was repeatedly raped by the gatekeeper. The victim
was rescued by a local teacher from a railway track at Kandarpur, who took her to the
http://www.childlineindia.org.in/pdf/Sep-2010.pdf
67.
Supreme Court order in the matter of Exploitation of Children in Orphanages in the State of Tamil Nadu
68.
[WP(Crl.)No.102/2007 & CrMP No.4359/2010], 1 September 2010
ACHR 27
police station. In her statement to the police, the victim, who was a resident of Ganjam
district, revealed that she was repeatedly raped by a gatekeeper of the orphanage since
her admission at the orphanage in February 2009. On the basis of the complaint, the
police registered a case and arrested the gatekeeper of the orphanage. However, the
orphanage authorities had refuted the allegations saying that the girl was mentally
unsound and she did not know what she was saying and further accused the school
teacher, who rescued the girl, of trying to tarnish the image of the orphanage.69
Case 35: Death, torture and sexual abuses of physically-challenged girls at

Kalyani Mahila Bal Seva Sanstha, Panvel in Maharashtra
In March 2013, the Mumbai Sessions Court awarded death penalty to Ramchandra
Karanjule, founder of Kalyani Mahila Bal Seva Sanstha, an orphanage, at Kalamboli
in Navi Mumbai, Mahrashtra for murdering an inmate of the orphanage. The Court
also convicted six persons including the founder, the caretaker and trustees of the
orphanage of sexually abusing 19 handicapped and mentally-challenged minor girls.
Mr. Karanjule along with the other accused had been abusing the mentally challenged
girls since 2007 till 2011 when the case was registered. The prosecution stated before
that court that Mr Karanjule not only raped the girls who were under his care but also
neglected to protect them from others.
While awarding the death penalty to Mr. Karanjule, the court noted that Mr Karanjule
has not only exploited the vulnerable, defenceless, physically disabled girls but also
exploited the emotions of the donors. While holding a quasi-parental position, the
accused has in fact breached the trust and fiduciary relationship with the inmates to
satisfy his insatiable lust.
The court observed that by dumping 19 girls in a 250-square foot, shop like enclosure,
which had no doors but only a rolling shutter, they were deprived of basic human
rights such as health and education. It is a case of custodial torture, custodial rape and
custodial murder.
The abuses in the home was brought to light following a routine visit by a panel,
set up by the Bombay High Court in 2011 to coordinate the functioning of state
orphanages. Five girls had died in the orphanage but no report was submitted to the
Child Welfare Committee or any other government authority. One of the girls, who
Mr. Karanjule was accused of murdering, died after being denied medical help despite
her having been ill for three months. Apart from being sexually abused, the girls were
beaten up and they had cigarette burn marks on their bodies and they were forcibly
made to consume alcohol.
The court awarded life imprisonment to Khandu Kasbe, a friend of the founder Mr.
Karanjule; and Prakash Khadke, office-bearer of the orphanage, for guilty of rape.
While Nanabhau, nephew of Mr. Karanjule, convicted of molesting the girls by using
Rape charge against orphanage employee, The Hindu, 17 August 2009

69.
28 ACHR
force, was sentenced to two years imprisonment. Sonali Badade, an office-bearer,

and Parvati Malve, caretaker of the girls, were convicted of aiding and abetting in the
crime committed by Mr. Karanjule and his other partners in crime and they were given
rigorous imprisonment for seven and five years respectively.70
Case 36: Official dismissed for sexual abuse of two girls at children home, Agra
in Uttar Pradesh
On 11 January 2011, the Director (Women Welfare), Uttar Pradesh dismissed Kaushal
Kumar, a Class-IV employee of Government Children Home (Infant), Agra in Uttar
Pradesh after he was found guilty of committing rape on two minor inmates of the
home in 2009. Kaushal Kumar used to get drunk and misbehave with the minor
inmates at the home. Two victims specifically confirmed allegations of sexual abuse by
Kaushal Kumar, following which he was suspended.71
Case 37: Sexual exploitation of girls at Swami Bal Nath Ashram, Ghaziabad,
Uttar Pradesh
On 1 December 2006, the Supreme Court sought an immediate response from the
National Commission for Women, NHRC and the District Magistrate after a private
TV channel a day earlier revealed sexual exploitation of about 65 girls, most of them
aged five or six years, and some mentally challenged, in the Swami Bal Nath Ashram
at Ghaziabad, in Uttar Pradesh. The district authority reportedly did not initiate any
action despite the matter being brought to its notice.72
Case 38: Sexual abuse of three girls in NGO-run destitute home, Himachal
Pradesh
On 29 November 2006, three destitute girls of Kanya Anath Ashram run by Mandava
Charitable Trust in Mandi district alleged that they were sexually abused by the
Founder-President of the Trust. In their statements recorded before the magistrate
they accused the President/Founder of sexual abuse and outraging their modesty and
making obscene gestures.73
Case 39: Repeated sexual abuse of minors by a Class IV employee at Rajikiya Bal
Grih (Shishu), Rampur in Uttar Pradesh
On 16 April 2012, the Allahabad High Court while hearing a matter of sexual abuse
case in children home directed the State government of Uttar Pradesh to prosecute the
Class IV employee Suresh Kumar, who was working at the Rajkiya Bal Grih (Shishu)
Rampur under section 376 (2)(c) and section 376(2)(f) IPC and to ensure that the
investigation and trial be concluded very expeditiously, if possible within 3 months.
The order was delivered following lack of action against perpetrators of sexual abuses
in children institutions in Uttar Pradesh.
Orphanage founder sentenced to death for murder of girl, The Hindu, 22 March 2013
70.
71.

72.
Court seeks NHRC response, The Asian Age, 6 December 2006
73.
Minor girls record statements in rape case, The Tribune, 30 November 2006
ACHR 29
During 2004-2005, Suresh Kumar, class-IV employee of Government Rajkiya Bal

Grih (Shishu) Rampur was accused of sexual abuse of a large number of minor orphan
girls in the Rampur Home. Medical report of three victim girls confirmed that they
were sexually assaulted repeatedly by Suresh Kumar. However, Suresh Kumar after
being suspended on 20 September 2005 got the inquiry proceedings against him
delayed on one pretext or another. Shockingly, Suresh Kumar even succeeded in
getting himself reinstated on 22 September 2009 due to the delay in the conduct of
the inquiry proceedings. Thereafter, Suresh Kumar even made charges against one
nurse Smt. Santosh Saxena. Further, Suresh Kumar complained that the nurse had
been able to procure the adverse medical reports of the girls confirming the allegations
of rape against him through the agency of her husband who was a senior pharmacist
in the Rampur district hospital. Finally, Suresh Kumar could only be dismissed as late
as on 26 February 2011, six years after his initial suspension. Expressing dismay over
lack of action by the state government of Uttar Pradesh, the Allahabad High Court
while hearing the matter of sexual abuse at Rajikiya Shishu Grih, Allahabad observed
as under:74
We fail to understand as to how this delinquent employee succeeded in getting
himself reinstated without the connivance of the authorities at the highest level.
We also fail to understand why he was not prosecuted under section 376 IPC
and other stringent provisions under the criminal law, and see no impediment
to his prosecution even at this stage, as there is no period of limitation for the
offence of rape by a staff member with a minor girl aged below 10 years in a
childrens institution which is punishable with imprisonment for not less than
10 years and which may extend up to life imprisonment with fine in view of
section 376(2)(c) or section 376(2)(f) IPC
We think that the present incident of sexual abuse of a large number of minor
girls was possible because of delays or non-action or inadequate action against
delinquent employees, in the present and other matters when found engaging
in such grave crimes. Only exemplary punishments for such offenders and
expeditious disposal of their inquiries and trials, possibly within two or three
months, can send out an appropriate deterrent message to others who may
contemplate committing such dastardly crimes in future.
2.4. Impact of sexual assault: Missing of children from juvenile justice

homes
In order to escape from sexual assault and other abuses, hundreds of children especially
girls go missing from the juvenile justice homes. The trafficking of these children also
cannot be ruled out.
74.
30 ACHR
On 20 July 2012, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court comprising Chief
Justice J N Patel and Justice K S Ahluwalia ordered a CBI probe into the alleged
disappearance of 40 girls from a West Bengal government-run home and another
run by an NGO. The directive was passed on a Public Interest Litigation filed after
the West Bengals Criminal Investigation Department failed to trace the girls who
went missing from the homes. According to the petition, 13 minor girls went missing
from a home run by an NGO near Kolkata on 29 October 2009 while 27 from a
government run children home in West Midnapore between 12 November 2009 and
18 March 2010. The petition also stated there were about 108 such children homes
in West Bengal.75
In March 2010, one inmate was reported missing from the observation home for girls,
Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. By February 2012, five more girls were reported missing
from the home. The girls, aged between 12 and 17 years, belong to Meerut, Sarahanpur
and Aligarh districts. They were apprehended in different theft cases. The Government
Observation Home for Juvenile Girls was opened in April 2009 at Raj Nagar area,
Ghaziabad and has been functioning from a rented accommodation. The administration
claimed that the girls fled the home as they had criminal records. However, child rights
activists alleged that trafficking gang was involved in the disappearance of the girls.
The Additional District Magistrate, Ghaziabad had conducted an enquiry into the
matter and the warden Zubeda Khan and District Probation Officer Rajeev Sharma
were transferred in May 2012.76 The NCPCR inspected the home after reports of the
girls went missing in June 2012 came to its notice. During investigation NCPCR
found that the records at the home were poorly kept and the home did not have
the requisite rent agreement to remain in the premises. Children in need of care and
protection were also sent to the Observation Home. At the time of NCPCR visit there
was only one girl child, aged 14, in the Home. During interaction with the NCPCR
team, the girl revealed that the old Superintendent made her sweep and mop and
wash utensils while on one occasion the superintendents daughter had made her wash
clothes. The girl further expressed her discomfort with the Superintendent peeping in
when she takes a bath and of being made to wash herself by the cold water on return
from hearing before CWC even in winters since she came to the home. The girl also
revealed that she was beaten on occasions and deprived of her designated items.77
In Karnataka, as many as 1,089 children below 14 years have gone missing from 34
Bala Mandirs (Childrens Homes) during February 2005 to February 2011 according
to an NGO, Odanadi Seva Samste. The missing children included 226 boys from
the Government Bala Mandir for Boys in Bangalore, 135 from Gulbarga, 116 from
Hassan, 111 from Davangere, 83 from Bellary, and 32 from Mysore. Among girls,
34 went missing from the Government Bala Mandir in Mysore, 18 from Bangalore,
West Bengal: 40 girls disappear from govt-run home, The Indian Express, 20 July 2012
75.
Girls go missing from juvenile home, 5 June 2012, Ghaziabad, The Millennium Post available at http://
76.
millenniumpost.in/NewsContent.aspx?NID=3416
77.
NCPCR Enquiry Report, available at: http://www.ncpcr.gov.in/Reports/NCPCR%20report%20on%20
child%20right%20violations%20in%20Ghaziabad.pdf
ACHR 31
11 from Bijapur, and nine each from Tumkur and Hubli. Pursuant to a petition
filed by Odanadi Seva Samste on the matter of missing children, the Karnataka
State Commission for Protection of Child Rights, in an interim order passed on 17
July 2011, directed the Chief Secretary of Karnataka to order an inquiry by a three-
member committee involving retired judges and submit a report in six months. The
Commission also directed the custodians of Bala Mandirs to inform the State Child
Welfare Committee and the Juvenile Justice Board about any future disappearance
within 24 hours and register First Information Reports.78 The inmates were forced to
stay in poor living conditions. Counselors remained absent at many Bala Mandirs. In
some cases, children were allegedly used by Bala Mandir officials as domestic helps.79
78.
79.
32 ACHR
3. How the Government of India allows protectors to

become predators in the juvenile justice homes?
Sexual assault on children in the juvenile justice homes continue unabated as the
Government of India i.e. the Ministry of Women and Child Development and the
State Governments refuse to implement the JJ(C&P)C Act in letter and spirit. The
Government of India failed to take any action on the four critical issues that remains
indispensable for combating child sexual abuse in the juvenile justice institutions.
First, though the Government of India launched much vaunted Integrated Child
Protection Scheme, the Ministry of Women and Child Development repeatedly failed
to raise the need for establishment of efficient and functioning Inspection Committees
which are mandatorily required to inspect each home in every three months. In fact,
Inspection Committees do not figure as a separate agenda item either in the website of
the Ministry or proceedings of the PAB. No separate budgetary allocation is made under
the ICPS for the proper functioning of the Inspection Committees. There appears to
be a conscious decision not to make the Inspection Committees functional.
Second, despite the JJ(C&PC) Act coming into force in 2002 and the Rules being
framed in 2007 which mandatorily requires registration of all juvenile justice homes
within six months after the Act came into force, as on date there are hundreds of juvenile
justice homes which remain unregistered and sexual assaults continues unchecked. The
State authorities failed to take measures as per Section 23 of the JJ(C&PC) Act if they
are found to be unfit.
Third, effective and functional Child Welfare Committees remain indispensible to

the juvenile justice administration. Apart from hearing of cases, the CWC is also
required under Rule 25 (p) to visit each institution where children are sent for care
and protection or adoption at least once in three months to review the condition of
children in institutions, with support of the State Government and suggest necessary
action and rule 25 (q) to monitor associations and agencies within their jurisdiction
that deal with children in order to check on the exploitation and abuse of children.
verify fit institutions, majority of them exist only on paper.
Fourth, recognising vulnerability of younger inmates, Rule 40 of the Juvenile Justice

Care and Protection of Children Rules 2007 provide for separate facilities for boys and
girls as well as per age i.e. for boys and girls up to 12 years, 13-15 years and 16 years
and above. This provision has not been complied with and the recommendations of
the PAB on the rationalization of the homes failed to address this particular issue.
ACHR 33
i. Inspection committees not the priority of the Integrated Child

Protection Scheme
a. Inspection Committees
Section 35 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act requires the
State Governments to constitute State, District or city level inspection committee on
the recommendation of the Selection Committee constituted under rule 91 of the
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007.
Rule 63 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 provides for
inspection of all child care institutions by District or City level inspection committee
constituted under sub-rule (1). Sub-rule (2) requires the inspection committees to
visit and oversee the conditions in the institutions and appropriateness of the processes
for safety, well being and permanence, review the standards of care and protection
being followed by the institutions, look out for any incidence of violation of child
rights, look into the functioning of the Management Committee and give appropriate
directions. Sub rule (5) provides that the inspection shall be carried out at least once in
every three months while sub rule (7) requires the inspection committee members to
interact with the children during the visits to the institution, to determine their well-
being and uninhibited feedback. Sub-rule (10) requires the inspection committee to
send its action taken report, findings and suggestions to the District Child Protection
Unit and the State Government while Sub-rule (9) requires all concerned authorities to
take follow up action on the findings and suggestion of the inspection committee.80
Sub-Rule 4 of Rule 63 states that the inspection team shall consist of a minimum
of five members with representation from the State Government, the Board or
Committee, the State Commission for the Protection of Child Rights or the State
Human Rights Commission, medical and other experts, voluntary organizations and
reputed social workers.
b. Integrated Child Protection Scheme

In 2009-2010, the Ministry of Women and Child Development launched the
Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) to bring several existing child protection
programmes under one umbrella with improved norms. The Scheme incorporates
other essential interventions, which aim to address issues which were, so far, not
covered by earlier Schemes. It is based on the cardinal principles of protection of
child rights and the best interest of the child. The aims of the ICPS are to (i)
institutionalize essential services and strengthen structures, (ii) enhance capacities at
all levels, (iii) create database and knowledge base for child protection services, (iv)
strengthen child protection at family and community level, (iv) ensure appropriate
inter sectoral response at all levels, and (v) raise public awareness.
ICPS target groups are children in need of care, children in conflict with law and other
children.
See Rule 63 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007
80.
34 ACHR
ICPS rehabilitation programme includes supports to the Child Line Foundation

for running Childline services in the country. It also supports open shelters and non
institutional care through adoption, sponsorship, foster care, after care and cradle baby
reception centres. For institutional support, the rehabilitation programme includes
shelter homes, children homes, observation homes, special homes and specialized
services. It provides General Grants in Aid to the State Governments to initiate projects
on issues / risks/ vulnerabilities which are not covered by the existing programs of the
ICPS.
ICPS provides support services to the Juvenile Justice Boards, Child Welfare
Committees and Special Juvenile Police Units.
Nowhere in the ICPS, the need for supporting the Inspection Committees including
making budgetary provision is found. Consequently, majority State governments
failed to appoint inspection committees at the State level, District or city level. Even
in States, where the inspection committees at the State, District or city level were
appointed, they largely remain non-functional. The inspection committee members
fail to visit to the child care institutions under their jurisdiction.
c. PABs record on the Inspection Committees

The Ministry of Women and Child Development itself has shown little concern for the
Inspection Committees. In the Project Approval Board (PAB) meetings, the need for
establishment of the inspection committees has not been raised systematically.
The Project Approval Board of the ICPS indeed never raised the issue of inspection
Committees with the state governments and the State governments also did not bring
the issue despite projects being approved since 2010. The PAB never raised the issue of
Inspection Committees with Delhi despite having meetings on 18 September 2012,81
29 August 2011,82 and 7 January 2011 despite the representatives of Delhi informing
that a Juvenile Justice Committee was formed under the Chief Justice of the High
Court with four Judges as members.83 Similarly, PAB failed to raised the issue with
Chhattisgarh on 27 November 2012 84 and o17 February 201185; with Puducherry
on 14 February 2013,86 22 November 2011 and 29 November 201087; with Bihar
on 30 January 2013,88 16 December 201189 and 28 September 201090; Jharkhand on
81.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Delhi%20PAB%20Minutes.pdf
82.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/DelhiMinutes25112011.pdf
83.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20of%20the%2010th%20PAB%20Meet-
ing%20Delhi.pdf
84.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/CHHT27nov2012.pdf
85.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Chattisgarh_Minutes.pdf
86.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/puducherry_pab_14-03-13.pdf
87.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20of%20seventh%20PAB[1].pdf
88.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/PAB_BIHAR_18-02-13.pdf
89.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/bihardtd03082012.pdf
90.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/2nd%20PAB%20meeting.pdf
ACHR 35
21 January 201391 and 17 June 201192; with Tripura on 27 November 201293 and 29
November 201094; with Uttar Pradesh on 31 October 2012,95 18 July 201196 and 15
February 2011,97 with Meghalaya on 25 October 201298 and 18 February 201199; and
Nagaland on 25 October 2012100 and 13 January 2011.101
PABs record of raising the issue of inspection committees in 2012-2013:

For 2012-13, the proceedings of the PAB for approval of grants under ICPS to the State
Governments and the Union Territories show that no question about the Inspection
Committees was raised with Chandigarh on 14 February 2013,102 Manipur on 14
February 2013,103 Puducherry on 14 February 2013,104 Dadra and Nagar Haveli on
20 February 2013,105 Bihar on 30 January 2013,106 Jharkhand on 21.01.2013,107
Chhattissgarh on 27 November 2012, 108 Daman and Diu on 27 November 2012,109
Tripura on 27 November 2012,110 Uttar Pradesh on 31 October 2012,111 Meghalaya
on 25 October 2012,112 Nagaland on 25 October 2012,113 Delhi on 18 September
2012,114 Madhya Pradesh on 18 September 2012,115 Tamil Nadu on 21 September
2012,116 and Gujarat on 30 August 2012.117
Astoundingly, Arunachal Pradesh claimed before the PAB that inspection committees
have been constituted in all the districts and at State level despite Arunachal Pradesh
having only one NGO run home which is not registered under the JJ (Care and
Protection of Children) Act and anther State run observation home.118 One wonders
91.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/PAB_jharkhand_20dec2012.pdf
92.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/jharkhandpabmindtd18072011.pdf
93.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/TRI27nov2012.pdf
94.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20of%20seventh%20PAB[1].pdf
95.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/UPdt31oct2012.pdf
96.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/UttarPradeshMinutes25112011.pdf
97.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/UP-Minutes.pdf
98.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Megdtd25102012.pdf
99.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20-PAB%20Manipur-Final%2017th%20Mar.
pdf
100.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/ngadtd25102012.pdf
101.
ing%20Nagaland%20&%20rajasthan[1].pdf
102.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/chandigarh_pab_14-03-13.pdf
103.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/manipur_pab_14-03-13.pdf
104.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/puducherry_pab_14-03-13.pdf
105.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/PAB_DADRA&NAGAR_20-02-13.pdf
106.
107.
108.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/CHHT27nov2012.pdf
109.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Daman&Diu27nov2012.pdf
110.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/TRI27nov2012.pdf
111.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/UPdt31oct2012.pdf
112.
113.
114.
115.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/updated%20minutes%20PAB%2018th%20sept%20%20
12%20MP(1).pdf
116.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/52nd%20PAB%20minutes%20-%20Tamil%20Nadu%20
%20-21.09.2012.pdf
117.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Guj.%20minutes%2030-8-12%20approved%20.pdf
118.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Arunachal%20Pradesh-PAB%20minutes%20approved.pdf
36 ACHR
what are the functions of the inspection committees in the remaining 15 districts! And
the PAB went along with the explanation.
Odisha claimed before the PAB on November 2012 that Inspection Committees have
been constituted in all the districts and at State level.119 Earlier, ACHR during a field
visit to the Govt. Observation Home and Children Home (Combined) at Berhampur
in Ganjam district from 29 September to 1 October 2010 following the escape of ten
juveniles found that the juveniles were subjected to repeated and serious abuse at the
Home. Minor inmates were regularly picked up by the staff and older inmates for
alleged purpose of assault/abuse. No inspection was carried out at this Home which
encouraged torture and abuses of the juveniles. Odishas claims could not be verified.
Similarly, Karnataka informed that Inspection Committees in all districts and

Management Committees for each home have been set up and 16 inspections have been
conducted till the time of PAB meeting on 28 June 2012. However, 16 inspections are
inadequate as Karnataka has 69 homes i.e. 43 Childrens Homes and 6 Observation
Homes (GO), 11 NGO run Children Homes and the Inspection Committees are
required to inspect every three months.120 ACHR however was informed that during
2009-2011, no inspection took place in the Balakara Bal Mandir, Gulbarga,121
Children Home for Boys, Chikmagalur,122 Government Observation Home (Boys),
Gulbarga,123 Government Observation Home, Dharward,124 the Government Juvenile
Home for Boys at Bagalkot and Government Juvenile Home for Girls at Bagalkot.125
Worst, in the case of the Balamandir for Boys, Belgaum, as of 23 September 2011
no inspection was done since 2007-08. The only inspection which was conducted by
the Women and Child Development Department was done in 2006-07.126 The large
number of missing inmates further call for urgent need of regulr inspections of the
juvenile justice homes in the State.
Maharashtra had also failed to inform the PAB as to whether Inspection Committees
were formed. It merely states that inspections have also been done by the SCPCR,
SAB and MSW students. In 2011-12 the State has also closed down 60 institutions
after inspections.127
119.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/ODIdt9nov2012.pdf
120.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Approved%20PAB%20Minutes%20Karnataka%202012-
2013.pdf
121.
RTI reply from Superintendent of Balakara Bal Mandir, Pragathi Colony, Gulbarga, Karnataka vide letter
No. CHG/RTI/Inf/2011-12/556
122.
RTI reply from Public Information Officer & Women & Child Development Officer, Women and
Child Development Department, Chikmagalur, Karnataka vide letter No. DDC:WCD-C-2:RIACT:11-
12/4751 dated 23.2.2012
123.
RTI reply from Superintendent of Govt Observation Home (Boys), Gulbarga, vide letter no. OHG/RTI/
Inf/2011-12/95 dated 22-2-2012
124.
RTI reply from the concerned authorities vide letter dated 27-2-2012
125.
RTI reply from Government Juvenile Home for Boys and Girls, Bagalkot, Karnataka, vide letter dated
14-2-2012
126.
RTI reply from Superintendent cum Probation Officer Balamandir for Boys, Belgaum, dated 23-9-
2011
127.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/mrdtd25072012.pdf
ACHR 37
With respect to Mizoram, on 6 July 2012 PAB inquired regarding constitution of

inspection committees and number of inspections conducted by them. The State
Government informed that only 31 inspections have been undertaken since 2007
when 7 of the 8 inspection committees were formed. The PAB advised Mizoram State
to activate the inspection committees as per JJ Act and State JJ Rules and regular
inspections; including surprise visits, should be undertaken. The State was also
advised to form Management Committees for each Child care Institution to oversee
the day to day management of the Homes.128 During the field visit in Mizoram
in September 2012, ACHR had found that in a number of juvenile justice homes,
there is hardly any inspection. The State Inspection Team has conducted only one
inspection at Government Observation Home-Cum-Special Home at Aizawl since its
establishment in 1986 and no inspection has been done by the State Inspection Team
at Government Observation Home-Cum-Special Home at Lunglei since its inception
in 2008. There has not been any inspection by the State Inspection Committee or
Mizoram State Child Protection Society (MSCPS)/ District Child Protection Society
(DCPS) officials at the three newly established Government-funded Shelter Homes at
Aizawl, Mamit and Champhai.129
On 6 July 2012, West Bengal informed the PAB that the Inspection Committees
constituted under the JJ Act had been constituted but inspections are not being
conducted as per the provision of the JJ Act as there was a dearth of personnel and
most officers were holding additional charge. The Child Development Project Officers
had been promoted in most districts for the task and did not have the requisite time
for inspections of JJ Homes, as a result of which, regular inspections were not being
conducted.130
The state government of Manipur failed to constitute Inspection Committees. The

Project Approval Board of the Ministry of Women and Child Development in its
35th Meeting held on 17 January 2012 noted that Inspection Committees have not
been set up for Homes as per Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,
2000.131
The State Government of Assam had appointed Inspection Committees at the State
level but had not appointed the Inspection Committees at the District and City Level
as on 12.04.2012.132
Haryana on 15 March 2012 informed the Project Approval Board that Inspection
Committees have been set up for Homes as per JJ(C&P)C Act. The PAB advised the
State government of Haryana to send these inspection reports to NCPCR regularly.133
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Approved%20Minutes%20Mizoram%202012-13.pdf
128.
State of Juvenile Justice in Mizoram, Asian Centre for Human Rights, 27 February 2013
129.
130.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Final%20Minutes%20PAB%20meeting%20West%20
Bengal%202012-2013.pdf
131.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/manipurdtd17012012.pdf
132.
No.SCPS(G)43/2011/151 dated 12.04.2012
133. http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Haryanadtd11062012.pdf
38 ACHR
However, the case of Apna Ghar Rohtak shows that inspection committees in the
State do not function. As per Section 63(2) of Central Juvenile Justice Rules, 2007,
the inspection committee shall visit and oversee the conditions in the institutions and
appropriateness of the process for safety, well-being, etc. Such inspections should be
carried out once in every three months. Had there been inspection by the inspection
committees as per the rules the cases of sexual abuses, torture and ill-treatment, child
labour, forcing the inmates into immoral activities, etc would have been detected.
Furthermore, children in need of care and protection and those with conflict with the
law were kept in the Apna Ghar shelter home.
In Goa, Inspection Committees were constituted at state and district level, but the
committees conduct inspections only during the time of registration or renewal of
childrens homes.134
PABs record of raising the issue of inspection committees in 2011:

The Project Approval Board under ICPS failed to raise any question about the
status of the Inspection Committees or the need to establish the same with Bihar
on 16 December 2011,135 with Puducherry on 22 November 2011; with Delhi on
29 August 2011,136 with Himachal Pradesh on 19 August 2011,137 with Sikkim on
26 July 2011,138 with Uttar Pradesh on 18 July 2011,139 with Karnataka on 14 July
2011;140 with Punjab141 and Jharkhand on 17 June 2011,142 with Manipur on 22
February 2011,143 with Meghalaya on 18 February 2011,144 with Maharashtra on 17
February 2011,145 with Chhattisgarh on 17 February 2011,146 with Uttar Pradesh on
15 February 2011,147 with Nagaland and Rajasthan on 13 January 2011,148 with Delhi
on 7 January 2011 despite the representatives of Delhi informed that a Juvenile Justice
Committee was formed under the Chief Justice of the High Court, with four Judges
as members. The Committee monitors the Homes, CWCs and NGOs as well as looks
into the working of the WCD Department.149
134.
Apna Ghar: Its time the system is sorted out, The Times of India, 19 April 2012
135.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/bihardtd03082012.pdf
136.
137.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/HPMinutes25112011.pdf
138.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/SikkimMinutes25112011.pdf
139.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/UttarPradeshMinutes25112011.pdf
140.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/KarnatakaMinutes25112011.pdf
141.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/punjabpabmin18072011.pdf
142.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/jharkhandpabmindtd18072011.pdf
143.
pdf
144.
pdf
145.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Maharashtra_Minutes-Final_17th_mar[1]dtd05052011.
pdf
146.
147.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/UP-Minutes.pdf
148.
ing%20Nagaland%20&%20rajasthan[1].pdf
149.
ing%20Delhi.pdf
ACHR 39
The PAB under ICPS in its meeting held on 22 November 2011 however advised the
state government of Madhya Pradesh to check the quality of the report submitted by
the district officials who are part of the Inspection Committees at district level. The
representative of the state government of Madhya Pradesh informed the PAB that
inspection committees have been set up for the homes as per the JJ(C&P)C Act and
inspection roster issued.150
The state government of Maharashtra informed the PAB on 22 November 2011 that
district advisory boards is under process which will act as inspection committees for
the homes as per the JJ(C&P)C Act.151
The representatives of Tamil Nadu informed the PAB on 11 October 2011 that
Inspection Committees were set up at district level.152
The PAB on 11 October 2011 noted that Inspection Committees for Homes were
not formed in Rajasthan. The representative from Rajasthan assured the PAB that the
District level Inspection Committees will be in place by 15 November 2011.153
The PAB on 28 September 2011 advised Andhra Pradesh to set up the Inspection
Committees as prescribed in the JJ(C&P)C Act expeditiously. The state representatives
informed the PAB that Inspection committees were not set up for Homes, but the
DCPU staff and CWCs/JJBs were inspecting the Homes regularly.154
The representatives of Orissa informed the PAB on 8 September 2011 that Inspection
Committees for Homes were set up in all districts. CWCs were also inspecting the
Homes regularly. An NGO, Aangan Trust was also commissioned to look into the
functioning of Homes and suggest improvements.155
The state representatives of Gujarat informed the PAB on 24 August 2011 that all
Inspection Committees will be formed within 2 months.156
PABs record of raising the issue of inspection committees in 2010:

The Project Approval Board under ICPS failed to raise any question about the status of
the Inspection Committees or the need to establish the same with Andhra Pradesh on
9 December 2010,157 with Kerala and Haryana on 3 December 2010,158 with Tripura
and Puducherry on 29 November 2010,159with West Bengal on 26 October 2010,160
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/mpdtd07032012.pdf
150.
151.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/TamilNaduMinutes25112011.pdf
152.
153.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Rajathanminutes25112011.pdf
154.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/APMinutes25112011.pdf
155.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/OrissaMinutes25112011.pdf
156.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/GujaratMinutes25112011.pdf
157.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20of%20the%209th%20meeting%20of%20
PAB-AP[1].pdf
158. http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20of%20the%20eighth%20PAB%20
Meeting[1].pdf
159. http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20of%20seventh%20PAB[1].pdf
160.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20of%20the%20Fifth%20PAB%20Meet-
ing%20under%20ICPS%20%20held%20on%2026th%20%E2%80%A6.pdf
40 ACHR
with Assam, Madhya Pradesh and Tamil Nadu on 22 October 2010,161 with Orissa on
1 October 2010,162 Gujarat and Bihar on 28 September 2010,163 Mizoram and Tamil
Nadu on 14 September 2010.164
The Madhya Pradesh government in a letter dated 8 March 2010 informed the
NCPCR that 26 Inspection Committees were functional in the state165 which has 50
districts. This literally means that Inspection Committees were not constituted in 24
districts. On 22 November 2011, the state government of Madhya Pradesh informed
during the Project Approval Board meeting that 70 Child Care Institutes (CCIs)
were identified in the state and many of them were functioning without registration.
Given that many of the CCIs were functioning without registration, it implies that no
inspection is done.
ii. Unregistered child care institutions: homes for abuse

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 as amended in 2006
states that All institutions for children in need of care and protection shall within a
period of six months from the date of commencement of Juvenile Justice Amendment
Act 2006 be registered under Sec 34 (3) of this Act.
While there are no punitive provisions per se for non-registration of the

institutions except Section 23 of the JJ(C&PC) Act which clearly provides that
Whoever, having the actual charge of, or control over, a juvenile or the child, assaults,
abandons, exposes or wilfully neglects the juvenile or causes or procures him to be assaulted,
abandoned, exposed or neglected in a manner likely to cause such juvenile or the child
unnecessary mental or physical suffering shall be punishable with imprisonment for a team
which may extend to six months, or fine, or with both. It is clear that appropriate action
can be taken by the authorities under Section 23 of the Act.
There are a large number of unregistered child care homes across the country where
inspection is seldom conducted and children remain at the mercy of the authorities as
well as older inmates as shown in the report.
Hundreds of children have been rescued from unregistered homes and they are often
subjected to serious sexual assault.
For instance, the two children homes at Mansarovar and Jagatpura in Jaipur, Rajasthan
from where 51 children were rescued on 12 March 2013;166 the Arya Anathalaya,
an orphanage in Daryaganj, Delhi,167 the NGO-run orphanage, Supurna ka Aangan
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/4thPAB-Meeting.pdf
161.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/3rd%20PAB%20meeting.pdf
162.
163.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/2nd%20PAB%20meeting.pdf
164.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/newminutesoffitrstPAB.pdf
165.
D.O. letter No./210/CS/JJA/2010 dated 8.3.2010 obtained under the RTI Act, 2005 by Suhas Chakma,
Director of Asian Centre for Human Rights
166.
167.
February 2012
ACHR 41
in Gurgaon, Haryana,168 and Sarbabhoutika Anatha Sishu Ashram Orphanage in

Rourkela, Odisha, among others, were not registered under the JJ(C&P)C Act.
In the aftermath of the Arya Orphanage sexual abuse case the Child Welfare
Committee had recommended that the Delhi Government must ensure that all the
children institutions run by the organisation get themselves registered under the
JJ(C&P)C Act.169Amidst more allegations of sexual abuses, the Delhi government
appointed a senior officer of the department of women and child development as
administrator of the orphanage to look after the regular administration and to take
steps to prevent further exploitation of 1,600-odd boys and girls living in the private
childrens home.170
The non-registration of childrens homes was repeatedly raised in various meeting of

the PAB such as with respect to Manipur on 21 February 2013,171 Bihar on 30 January
2013,172 Jharkhand on 21 January 2013,173 Odisha on 9 November 2012174 and 8
September 2011,175 Meghalaya on 25 October 2012,176 Nagaland on 25 October
2012, 177 Tamil Nadu on 18 September 2012,178 Madhya Pradesh on 18 September
2012179 and 22 November 2011,180 Delhi on 18 September 2012181 and 29 August
2011,182 Gujarat on 30 August 2012183 and 24 August 2011,184 Arunachal Pradesh on
29 August 2012,185 Rajasthan on 29 August 2012186 and 11 October 2011,187 Andhra
Pradesh on 11 July 2012188 and 28 September 2011,189 Assam on 11 July 2012,190
Mizoram on 16 July 2012191 and 15 March 2012192, Karnataka on 28 June 2012193
168.
169.
Orphanage not even registered under Juvenile Justice Act, The Hindu, 13 February 2012
170.
GOVT APPOINTS ADMINISTRATOR TO MANAGE CHILDREN HOME, The Hindustan Times,
14 February 2012
171.
172.
173.
174.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/ODIdt9nov2012.pdf
175.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/OrissaMinutes25112011.pdf
176.
177.
178.
%20-21.09.2012.pdf
179.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/updated%20minutes%20PAB%2018th%20sept%20%20
12%20MP(1).pdf
180.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/mpdtd07032012.pdf
181.
182.
183.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Guj.%20minutes%2030-8-12%20approved%20.pdf
184.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/GujaratMinutes25112011.pdf
185.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Arunachal%20Pradesh-PAB%20minutes%20approved.pdf
186.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/48th%20PAB%20minutes%20-%20Rajasthan.pdf
187.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Rajathanminutes25112011.pdf
188.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Andhara%20Pradesh%20Final%20PAB%20minutes%20
2012-13.pdf
189.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/APMinutes25112011.pdf
190.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Minutes%20Assam%20Final.pdf
191.
192.
193.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Approved%20PAB%20Minutes%20Karnataka%202012-
2013.pdf
42 ACHR
and 14 July 2011,194 Haryana on 15 March 2012,195 Tripura on 17 January 2012,196

Kerala on 17 January 2012,197 Maharashtra on 22 November 2011,198 Puducherry on
22 November 2011,199 Himachal Pradesh on 19 August 2011,200 and Chhattisgarh on
17 February 2011,201 among others.
In Kerala, a large number of Homes are not registered under the JJ(C&PC) Act.
On 17 January 2012, the PAB advised Kerala to take immediate steps to register
the homes.202 In Manipur, there are a number of children homes, orphanages etc
run privately. However, the state government of Manipur informed the PAB on 21
February 2013 that only 11 NGO-run homes were registered under Section 34(3) of
the JJ(C&PC) Act.203
The identification and registration is very tardy. Meghalaya could not register over
40 Child Care Institutions (CCIs) as on 25 October 2012 despite the CCIs being
identified.204 The PAB on 25 October 2012 urged Nagaland to expedite the process
of registration of CCIs on priority basis after it informed that 30 CCIs were identified
but only 18 were registered.205 Tamil Nadu closed 76 CCIs following complaints and
registered 1418 CCIs, but 112 CCIs could not be registered as on 18 September
2012.206
iii. Non-functioning of Child Welfare Committees

Effective and functional Child Welfare Committees remain indispensible to the juvenile
justice administration. Apart from hearing of cases, the CWC is also required under
Rule 25 (p) to visit each institution where children are sent for care and protection
or adoption at least once in three months to review the condition of children in
institutions, with support of the State Government and suggest necessary action and
rule 25 (q) to monitor associations and agencies within their jurisdiction that deal
with children in order to check on the exploitation and abuse of children.
verify fit institutions, majority of them exist only on paper.
A few state governments undermine such important functions of the CWC and
prevent it from visiting the Child Care Institutions. For example, in October 2010,
194.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/KarnatakaMinutes25112011.pdf
195.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/Haryanadtd11062012.pdf
196.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/tripuradtd17012012.pdf
197.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/keraladtd17012012.pdf
198.
199.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/puducherydtd07032012.pdf
200.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/HPMinutes25112011.pdf
201.
202.
http://wcd.nic.in/icpsmon/pdf/PAB-Minutes/keraladtd17012012.pdf
203.
204.
205.
206.
%20-21.09.2012.pdf
ACHR 43
the Karnataka government reportedly issued an order preventing members of Child

Welfare Committees from visiting child care institutions when they are not holding a
sitting, without prior permission of the heads of the concerned institutions. This is a
violation of the Juvenile Justice Rules of Karnataka, 2010 which gives the power to
the CWCs to visit any child care institution any time. Further, the Government Order
gives power to the Deputy Director of Department of Women and Child Development
of Karnataka to visit and review cases being dealt by the CWCs once in 15 days
which could interfere into the functioning of the CWCs.207 This also effectively rules
out the possibility of random and surprise inspections and questions the autonomy
of the CWC, the Chairperson of which has the judicial powers of a Metropolitan
Magistrate.
Rule 25 (4) provides that the CWC shall meet a minimum of three days a week, which
may be extended by the State Government depending on case and pendency of work
while Rule 23 states that the Chairperson and Members of the Committee shall be
paid such travel and sitting allowance, as the State Government may determine but
it shall not be less than rupees five hundred per sitting per member. But, Member of
JJB, Indore informed that contrary to the provision they were being provided with
only Rs.120/-.
Even where the Child Welfare Committees have been formed, they seldom function
properly. On 16 April 2012, the Allahabad High Court while hearing the matter of
sexual abuse at Rajikiya Shishu Grih, Allahabad rightly observed as under208:
The Court must also express its disappointment that the Child Welfare Committees
consisting mainly of Social Workers which have been constituted under the Juvenile
Justice Act (2000) [JJ Act] for attending to the welfare of children, have shown little
proactive sensitivity for addressing the myriad problems relating to children, but have
simply been passing orders in a mechanical and bureaucratic manner, with no sense
of mission and thus have given little relief to children in distress.
Surprise inspections in the Juvenile Justice Homes by CWC, Child Rights Commissions,
etc are required to be conducted at regular intervals in order the secure the best interest
of the children. The effectiveness of the surprise inspection is reflected in the spot visit
conducted at the NGO-run Apna Ghar Shelter Home in Rohtak, Haryana by the
NCPCR in May 2012. Though not a surprise visit as the NCPCR informed about
the visit before arrival at the Home, the NCPCR team found that before the visit
of any Official/Dignitary/Celebrity the children were always threatened not to talk
to any outsider about any punishments or complain on any other matter including
food/clothes/education etc. Still the children were threatened just sometime before the
teams arrival after the news of the visit was broken to the Home. The NCPCR team
also found the presence of police officer identified as Bhim Singh Ranga of Gandhi
Curbs on CWC members worry child rights activists, The Hindu, 1 November 2010
207.
Available at: http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do

208.
44 ACHR
Camp Police Station at an inappropriate time who failed to give any satisfactory
explanation for his presence.209
Currently, juvenile justice homes are visited by concerned officials only after crimes
are reported. Surprise visits will act as deterrent. As this report shows majority of
the incidents were committed with the active participation of the staff of the juvenile
justice homes or in connivance of the officials. However, little punitive action had
been taken by the concerned authorities and bodies mandated to provide protective
environment of children in the juvenile justice homes. Even if the reports of abuses
emerge all out effort is made to cover-up. Consequently, it emboldens the culprits,
resulting in recurrence of such acts of criminal misconduct.
Table 3: State-wise list of the Child Welfare Committees

Sl No Name of the State Number of No of Child Welfare
Districts Committees
1. Andhra Pradesh 23 23
2. Assam 27 27
3. Bihar 38 28
4. Delhi 9 6
5. Gujarat 26 25
6. Haryana 21 9
7. Himachal Pradesh 12 12
8. Jharkhand 24
9. Karnataka 30 30
10. Kerala 14 14
11. Madhya Pradesh 50 48
12. Maharashtra 35 35
13. Manipur 9 9
14. Meghalaya 11 7
15. Mizoram 8
16. Nagaland 11 11
17. Orissa 30 30
18. Rajasthan 33 33
19. Sikkim 4 4
20. Tamil Nadu 32 20
21. Tripura 8 4
22. Uttar Pradesh 75 69
23. West Bengal 19 18
Total 462
Rohtak shelter home sealed after at least 100 women and children allege sexual, physical abuse, NDTV,
209.
9 June 2012, http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/rohtak-shelter-home-sealed-after-at-least-100-women-

and-children-allege-sexual-physical-abuse-229317
ACHR 45
iv. Lack of segregation on the basis of offences, sex and age

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules 2007 underscored the
need of classification and separation of the children on the basis of the nature of the
offences, age and sex.
Rule 40(2)(a) (b)states

a. Observation Home:
(i) Separate observation homes for girls and boys;
(ii) Classification and segregation of juveniles according to their age group
preferably 7-11 years, 12-16 years and 16-18 years, giving due consideration
to physical and mental status and the nature of the offence committed.
(b) Special Home:
(i) Separate special homes for girls above the age of 10 years and boys in the age
groups of 11 to 15 and 16 to 18 years;
(ii) Classification and segregation of juveniles on the basis of age and nature of
offences and their mental and physical status
(c) Childrens Home:
(i) While children of both sexes below 10 years can be kept in the same home,
separate bathing and sleeping facilities shall be maintained for boys and girls
in the age group of 5-10 years;
(ii) Separate childrens homes for boys and girls in the age group of 7-11 and
12- 18 years;
(iii) Separate facilities for children in the age group of 0-5 years with appropriate
facilities for infants.
However, these provisions are often not adhered to in the juvenile justice homes across
the country. The lack of segregation on the basis of the nature of offences, age and sex
facilitates senior inmates to perpetrate the offences upon minor inmates including girls
and junior inmates.
Asian Centre for Human Rights found the lack of segregation of inmates in a number
of States as given below.
Mizoram
At Observation Home-cum-Special Home at Lunglei in Mizoram there is no
segregation of the juveniles on the basis of age and nature of offences as provided
under the JJ (C&PC) Act.210
Madhya Pradesh
In the Observation Home, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, segregation was done on the
basis of age but not on the nature of offences. On 17 April 2012, ACHR researcher
Information obtained from officials during ACHR researchers field visit to Observation Home-Cum-
210.
Special Home at Lunglei on 29 September 2012
46 ACHR
interviewed Mr. Ashish Kumar Singh, Superintendent of the Observation Home,

Indore who stated that segregation was done only on the basis of age and not on
the nature of offences. However, Mr Singh informed that they have separate beds to
sleep.
Karnataka
At Govt Children Home for Boys, Chitradurga, there were 28 inmates in April 2011,
27 in May 2011, 48 in June 2011, 50 in July 2011, 51 in August 2011 and 50 in
September 2011 (upto 22 September).211 But the authorities informed ACHR that
there was no segregation of the inmates on the basis of age and nature of offence.212
Similarly in Childrens Home for Boys, Mysore, there is no segregation of children on
the basis of age.213
Himachal Pradesh
There is no segregation of the children in conflict with law (CCL) at the lone
Observation Home-cum-Special Home at Una as well as of the children in need of
care and protection (CNCP) at various Children Homes across the state as required
under Section 9(4) of the JJ(C&PC) Act.
Replying to an RTI application filed by ACHR, District Programme Officer of

Una stated that juveniles are being kept separately based on their age and nature of
sickness.214 However, at the time of ACHRs visit on 19 April 2012 there were 10
juveniles (whose cases are being heard by JJBs) who were kept in a single dormitory
irrespective of their age and nature of offence.215
Similarly, separation of children is not maintained at some Children Homes such as

Balika Ashramcum-Children Home at Mashobra, Shimla district216, Bal Ashram-
cum-Children Home at Masli, Shimla district217 and Children Home at Sunder Nagar,
Mandi district.218 There is lack of proper understanding about the need for separation
of children provided in the JJ(C&PC) Act. While responding to an RTI application,
the District Programme Officer, Shimla replied that separation of children was not
being maintained at Balika Ashramcum-Children Home, Mashobra, Shimla district
on the ground that there was no child in conflict with law sheltered in the Ashram!219
This is despite the fact that Rule 29(1) of the JJ(C&PC) Act states that e) every
211.
RTI reply from Deputy Director, Dept of Women and Child Development, Chitradurga, Karnataka, No.
DD/CTA/DWCD/CR-1/RTI/11-12/3422 dated 23-09-2011
212.
RTI reply from Deputy Director, Dept of Women and Child Development, Chitradurga, Karnataka, RTI
dated 9/2/2012
213.
RTI reply from Department of Women and Children Welfare, Govt of Karnataka, Letter No.
CHB:M:R.T.I:2011-12 dated 4-1-2012
214.
RTI reply received from District Programme Officer, Una, dated 5 January 2012
215.
Interview with Ms Laxmi Kant, Acting Superintendent of Observation Home cum Special Home for
Boys and Girls at Samoor Kalan, Una and District Programme Officer, Una, 19 April 2012
216.
RTI reply from District Programme Officer, Shimla, dated 7-5-2012
217.
218.
RTI reply from PIO cum District Programme Officer, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, vide letter No. ICDS.
MMO-RTI-706 dated 8 June 2012
219.
ACHR 47
childrens home shall include separate facilities for children in the age group of 0-5
years with appropriate facilities for the infants and (g) children in the age group of
10 to 18 shall be further segregated into two groups of 10 to 15 years and 15 to 18
years.
Manipur
Both boys and girls were kept in the Observation Home run by NGO, Health
Integrated Ministries, Rengkai at Shan Veng in Churachandpur district.
Orissa
From 29 September 2010 to 1 October 2010, ACHR conducted an on-the-spot
investigation at the Govt Observation Home, Special Home and Childrens Home
(Combined) for Boys at Berhampur, Gamjam district, Odisha. ACHR found that
different categories of children were kept in the juvenile home. Both the children in
conflict with the law and children in need of care and protection such as orphans and
abandoned were held in the same facilities. ACHR also found that some of the inmates
were above the age of 18 years. At least two inmates were over 30 years of age.
48 ACHR
Asian Centre for Human Rights is dedicated to promotion
and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms
in the Asian region by:
n providing accurate and timely information and
complaints to the National Human Rights Institutions,
the United Nations bodies and mechanisms as
appropriate;
n conducting investigation, research, campaigning and
lobbying on country situations or individual cases;
n increasing the capacity of human rights defenders
and civil society groups through relevant trainings
on the use of national and international human rights
procedures;
n providing input into international standard setting
processes on human rights;
n providing legal, political and practical advice according
to the needs of human rights defenders and civil society
groups; and
n by securing the economic, social and cultural rights
through rights-based approaches to development.
Asian Centre for Human Rights

C-3/441-C, Janakpuri, New Delhi 110058 INDIA
Phone/Fax: +91 11 25620583, 25503624
Website: www.achrweb.org
Email: suhaschakma@achrweb.org

IndiasHellHoles2013 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IndiasHellHoles2013 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IndiasHellHoles2013 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indias Hell Holes:

Child Sexual Assault in Juvenile Justice Homes

Asian Centre For Human Rights

Asian Centre For Human Rights

First published March 2013

Asian Centre for Human Rights, 2013

No part of this publication can be reproduced or transmitted in any form or

Suggested contribution Rs. 295/-

Acknowledgement: This report is being published as a part of

Case 22: Sexual abuse of HIV positive children by the Manager

ACHR Asian Centre for Human Rights

Ashram Shelter Home

Bala Mandir Children Home

Duppatta A long multi-purpose scarf worn by women across both

Holi A religious festival celebrated by Hindus as a festival of

Samprekshan Grih Observation Home

Shishu greh Children Home

1. Executive Summary and Recommendations

It will not be an understatement to state that juvenile justice homes, established to

ii. Unregistered child care institutions

iii. Non-functional Child Welfare Committees

Conclusion and recommendations

Available at: http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do

Asian Centre for Human Rights recommends the following:

To Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India to:

2. Indias hell holes: Sexual assaults in juvenile

2.1. Child sexual abuse in India

2.2. Juvenile justice homes

Crime in India reports from 2001-2011, National Crime Records Bureau

Odisha 17 21 55 31 28 101 92 65 87 74 165 736

Sl No Name of the State Number of Homes

2.3. Emblematic cases of child sexual assaults in juvenile justice homes

was accused of sexual harassment during counseling sessions. The remaining 27

Case 4: Sodomy and physical assault by senior inmates at Kuldabad Juvenile

9 juveniles booked for sodomy, The Times of India, 20 March 2013

Case 7: Sexual abuse of a minor girl by Manager of a childcare home in Delhi

Case 8: Rape of minor girl at Swami Gnanananda Ashram orphanage, Andhra

Case 9: Sexual and physical abuse at juvenile home, Kottayam, Kerala

Case 10: Sexual abuse of 10 girls by Secretary of Peralassery Yatheemkhana

Case 14: Sexual abuse at a destitute home at Vasanthapuram, Tamil Nadu

Case 15: Sexual abuse of girls by staff of NGO-run orphanage in Gurgaon,

Case 17: Apna Ghar case, Rothak in Haryana

9 June 2012, http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/rohtak-shelter-home-sealed-after-at-least-100-women-

Reportedly restoring children to mothers/relatives without any specific orders

able at: http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do

42 children rescued from orphanage, Deccan Herald, 29 February 2012

Case 23: Arya Orphanage Case in Daryaganj, Delhi

Case 27: Sexual abuse of girls at Elsadi Jebathottam Orphanage, Thoothukudi,

Case 28: Sexual harassment by CWC member during counseling in Bangalore,

Case 29: Sexual abuse by founder of Siria Orphanage Home, Hyderabad,

Andhra Pradesh following a sting operation conducted by a vernacular news channel

Orphanage founder arrested, The Hindu, 13 September 2010

Immanual, a shelter home in Kanyakumari, Tamil Nadu following a complaint of

[WP(Crl.)No.102/2007 & CrMP No.4359/2010], 1 September 2010

Case 35: Death, torture and sexual abuses of physically-challenged girls at

Rape charge against orphanage employee, The Hindu, 17 August 2009

force, was sentenced to two years imprisonment. Sonali Badade, an office-bearer,

able at: http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/WebShowJudgment.do

During 2004-2005, Suresh Kumar, class-IV employee of Government Rajkiya Bal