Judgment :- K. Chandru, J. Heard the arguments of Mrs. D. Geetha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. M. Dhandapani, learned Special Government Pleader representing the respondents and perused the records. 2. In W.P. No. 36778 of 2005, the writ petition is filed by one Advocate seeking for a direction to the Child Welfare Committee at Chennai to initiate legal action under the Code of Criminal Procedure against the perpetrators of violence against those children who are produced before the Child Welfare Committee and also to provide assistance of an Advocate to the children who are produced before the Child Welfare Committee in Tamil Nadu. 3. In her affidavit, she had stated that a 13 years old girl, by name, Priyanka was sexually abused by her father for over 7 years. The girls father also took her to an Internet Cafe to watch pornographic pictures. This made her to run away from the house and she was rescued by the Child Welfare Committee at Erode and committed to appear before the Chennai Committee. A complaint was given to the third respondent. As no action was taken, the issue was represented before the Committee comprising of three members. When they made a representation on behalf of the child, it was stated that the Committee can permit representation by legal counsel only to prisoners and not to children in need of care and protection and it does not encourage the lawyers meeting the children kept under their custody. It was also stated that similar experience was gained before several other Child Welfare Committees in Tamil Nadu. Therefore, after referring to the Rules framed under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000, the petitioner found that the said Rules were lacking to cover the areas and are not in tune with the requirements mandated by the Act. Therefore, she prayed that the Rules must be made in tune with the provisions of the Cr.P.C. and the Rules must provide for the following:- 1. To register a complaint as and when cases of child abuse is reported before the Child Welfare Committee 2. To provide the assistance of a lawyer and a social worker to the victim of child abuse as per the the guidelines of the Supreme Court in Delhi Domestic Working Womens Forum – Vs – Union of India and others [ 1995 (1) SCC 14 ] 3. To provide the assistance of a lawyer and a social worker to the victim of child abuse as per the the guidelines of the Supreme Court in Delhi Domestic Working Womens Forum – Vs – Union of India and others [ 1995 (1) SCC 14 ] 3. To permit the lawyers to have interviews with the children coming under the purview of Juvenile Justice System whether as children in need of care and protection or children in conflict with law. 4. This Court, by an order dated 111. 2005, directed an Advocate of this Court to interview the victim girl Priyanka and also to make a report to this Court. Subsequently, by an order dated 211. 2005, this Court formed a Committee and paragraph 5 of the said order may be reproduced:- "By consent of the parties, we constitute a Committee consisting of the Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Director, Social Defence, Mrs. Andal Damodaran, General Secretary, Indian Council for Child Welfare, Mr. R. Muthukumaraswamy, Additional Advocate General, Smt. Geetha Ramaseshan, Advocate, and Mrs. D. Geetha, Advocate. The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, shall be the convener of the Committee. The Committee shall submit a representation to this Court within a period of eight weeks." 5. Pursuant to the direction, a meeting was held on 012. 2005. Thereafter, two consultative meetings were held on 112. 2005 and 212. 2005 with experts in the field. Finally, on 01.02.2006, the Committee met and finalised the draft Rules and the same was circulated to this Court along with the report of the Committee. Copies of the draft rules were furnished to counsel for both sides. 6. Even when this proceedings are pending, another Advocate by name, S. Anbazhagan filed a writ petition being W.P. No. 23407 of 2007 stating that four juveniles, who were arrested in Crime No. 3304 of 2007 on 26. 2007, were remanded to judicial custody and to be kept in Central Prison, Tiruchirapalli by the Judicial Magistrate No. II, Mayilauthurai. This was inspite of the fact that these persons were juveniles and had submitted before the Judicial Magistrate the proofs regarding their age. He had also stated that while the adult offenders were granted bail, in the case of juveniles, no such facilities are given. This was inspite of the fact that these persons were juveniles and had submitted before the Judicial Magistrate the proofs regarding their age. He had also stated that while the adult offenders were granted bail, in the case of juveniles, no such facilities are given. Due to lack of availability of Probation Officers, the process was delayed and it interferes with the liberty of the children in conflict with law in obtaining bail as well as getting their final order of acquittal. When the matter came up on 07. 2007, this Court passed the following order:- "Heard Mrs. Geetha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The fourth respondent / Inspector of Police, Poraiyur Police Station is directed to refer the four accused / juveniles involved in Crime No. 3304/07 to the third respondent / Observation Home. The second respondent / Judicial Magistrate No. II, Mayilauthurai and Inspector of Police, Poraiyur Police Station / fourth respondent are directed to act upon the copy of his order authenticated by the Registrar General, High Court, Madras." 7. Pursuant to the direction, a compliance report was submitted by the District Judge, Nagapattinam with a covering letter dated 7. 2007. On behalf of the fourth respondent Inspector of Police, a counter affidavit dated 20.7.2007 was also filed. In view of the order passed by this Court, the four juveniles were transferred from Central Prison, Tiruchirapalli, to the Government Children Welfare Home at Thanjavur. 8. W.P. No. 4952 of 2007 was filed by one Suseela Balu, claiming to be the President of the Federation of Self Help Groups, Chennai seeking for a direction to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Ashok Nagar and Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ashok Nagar to release one juvenile Ashok kumar detained by them in the Police Station and to take penal action against the guilty police officers as well as to order appropriate compensation and to comply with Section 63 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000. 9. When this matter came up on 09.02.2007, it was informed that the said juvenile Ashok Kumar was involved in Crime No. 237/07. However, this Court prima facie found that he was a juvenile and he was directed to be released on bail on his parents furnishing a bond and that he will be produced before the Juvenile Justice Court on 112. 2007. We were told that the said order was also complied with. However, this Court prima facie found that he was a juvenile and he was directed to be released on bail on his parents furnishing a bond and that he will be produced before the Juvenile Justice Court on 112. 2007. We were told that the said order was also complied with. 10. Even though the three writ petitions arose in three different contexts, but yet our focus is on the need to frame proper Rules under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 as amended by the Central Act 33 of 2006. 11. Mrs. D. Geetha and Mrs. Sudha Ramalingam, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that though they are generally satisfied with the draft Rules submitted by the Committee to this Court for approval, they pleaded that some areas require fine tuing. They had submitted that the Rules relating to ascertainment of age and assistance of a lawyer for the juvenile were not adequate. It is also submitted that subsequent to the report of the Committee dated 01.02.2006, the Act itself had undergone an amendment by Central Act 33 of 2006 (which came into force on 28. 2006) and the Committee did not have the benefit of the amended provision. Hence, they sought for a direction to the State to consider and recast the Rules in the light of these amendments. 12. They also made the following suggestions to be incorporated in the form of Rules or notifications:- 1. Prompt production of case properties and complaint copy pending in the Sessions Court – especially when the offence is committed by a juvenile jointly with an adult. 2. Prompt execution of Bailable warrants 3. Time frame to receive Probation Officers Report 4. Legal Aid Advocate and other Advocates are not participating in the enquiry proceedings before the Child Welfare Committee. 5. The atmosphere in the court to be made child friendly 6. Place of safety for a juvenile is not declared so that the children who have committed minor offences are made to stay with young adults who have committed offences of very serious nature 7. Alternate institution is provided for sending a person who was a juvenile while committing an offence, but has become an adult before apprehension or before completion of inquiry. 8. Alternate institution is provided for sending a person who was a juvenile while committing an offence, but has become an adult before apprehension or before completion of inquiry. 8. Police and other investigative bodies must be made to give highest priority for the expeditious processing of cases against juveniles and ensure a shortest possible duration of detention during trial period. 9. Housing large number of children who had come in conflict with law with just one dormitory could be counter productive and will be against the norms laid down in the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty – 1990. For example, in Chennai to house children who have come in conflict with Law there is one Observation Home for boys with a huge dormitory allotted for sleeping, eating, reading and recreational purposes. The sanctioned strength is 100. According to them, these rules prescribe for the de-centralization of Detention Facilities for juveniles and the number of juveniles in closed facilities should be small enough to enable individualised treatment. The rules also stress the danger to juveniles of "criminal contamination" while in detention pending trial must not be under-estimated. 10. It is stated that facilities for professional counselling and mentor ship is grossly inadequate. Fund allocation to be made to access professional counselors to interact individually in a sustained manner. Without such programmed intervention by persons with professional competency, the very purpose of detaining Juveniles either in the Observation Home or in the Special Home will be lost. 11. Toilet cubicles to be provided with doors – even if latches are avoided for safety reasons – Juveniles deprived of their liberty have the right to facilities and services that meet all the requirements of health and human dignity. 12. The Observation Home in-mates should have free access to a well equipped library stocked with multi-lingual reading material that includes educative and recreational books, periodicals, self improvement books that are suitable to the juveniles. 13. Remedial physical therapy such as yoga, meditation and other form of facilities for exercise to be provided. 14. Modules for group counselling, developed with adequate processional support to be made available to the JJB as envisaged in the act. 15. List of community service centres to be enlisted with public cooperation with individuals in the centre assuming the role of mentors. 16. 14. Modules for group counselling, developed with adequate processional support to be made available to the JJB as envisaged in the act. 15. List of community service centres to be enlisted with public cooperation with individuals in the centre assuming the role of mentors. 16. Providing adequate counseling support to the family members of the juveniles is critical in reforming the children who have come into conflict with law and to prevent repeat offences committed by them. 17. Selection of committee members should be done judiciously. Greater care to be taken to ensure that the members are in a position to devote time and discharge their duties properly. If they are working elsewhere they must be asked to produce the employers consent to accept this responsibility. 18. Honorarium to CWC members to be raised. For example, the CWC members are called upon to hear and dispose on an average 800 cases per year in the City of Chennai alone. Present honorarium of Rs.1500 paid per month is not sufficient. 19. An additional CWC may also be constituted in regions where case load exceeds 400 an year. 20. Most basic facilities such as provision of typewriter, a typist, telephone, contingency fund – not provided to the committee functioning in Chennai. Quite often orders issued by them were written by hand. 21. Provision of one Probation Officer is grossly inadequate considering the large number of cases involved. Further the Probation Officers are often assigned with additional duties and responsibilities by the department other than carrying out the orders issued by the CWC. Provision of two more Probation Officers and voluntary probationary services with a budget provision to pay honorarium to be implemented. 22. One critical area which requires immediate attention is pertaining to those children who lost contact with their families permanently or whose parentage is not known. Their loneliness is real and they pleaded that they want somebody to visit them on a regular basis. Once an initial attempt made by an over stretched Probation Officer fails the child hardly gets a second chance to trace her family and he or she is permanently condemned to an institution. Therefore, a committee of professionals be formed to reopen their files periodically to explore the possibility of tracing their families. Children who practically have nobody should be considered for adoption if they are in suitable age for such rehabilitation. Therefore, a committee of professionals be formed to reopen their files periodically to explore the possibility of tracing their families. Children who practically have nobody should be considered for adoption if they are in suitable age for such rehabilitation. Other children should receive special attention and they could be linked with NGOs whose representatives could visit them on a regular basis and play the role of a mentor. 23. For children below five years Institutionalization to be resorted to as last option, especially for those who have parent or guardian. In majority of the cases the mother will be a deserted or a widowed woman economically incapacitated to take care of the child. CWC has no option except to place the child in an institution authorized under the Act and order the Government to pay Rs.450 as maintenance cost for the child. Since the regular visitation by the mother and the childs bonding with her causes hardship to the institutions in keeping custody of the child, some of the private institutions put a ban on the mother from seeing the child for a period of three years. This infringes the rights of the child and the parents. Hence the CWC must be empowered to order for the payment of Rs.450 to the mother herself so that she could keep the child, if necessary under supervision as ordered by the Committee. 24. The State Government must set up homes under J.J. Act facilities for women to stay with their infant children and the mothers could be helped out to find gainful employments. 25. When siblings are brought under the purview of the Act needing care and protection they get immediately separated age vice and sex vice and put into separate institutions. If they are total orphans they may never get to see each other until they reach the age of majority. The rule should have provision to set up a separate forum manned by an NGO or by a Government official in every region who will periodically review their records and compulsorily arrange for the meetings of the siblings at least once in three months. 26. In the Reception Homes, at any given time children are kept in large numbers with minimal staff strength and their liberty curtailed. Children with different physical and emotional needs, differently abled children, and victims of abuse are all treated alike. 26. In the Reception Homes, at any given time children are kept in large numbers with minimal staff strength and their liberty curtailed. Children with different physical and emotional needs, differently abled children, and victims of abuse are all treated alike. In the Government boys home only a watchman was acting as a caretaker. Children stagnate in the Reception Home due to delay in case disposal that occur largely because of lack of adequate probation officers who are designated to produce social history report of each child to the CWC so that they could issue suitable orders. There is one sanctioned post as probation officer in Chennai for a case load of 600. At any time quite a few children waiting for weeks or months even after CWC orders have been issued for want of escort to transport them to their native place / native State. Locked up in dormitory with restricted movement, and nothing to do for the whole day -coupled with their anxiety to get back to their families generally makes the children wearisome of the J.J. Act intervention. Visitation by a part time teacher thrice a week to handle 50 to 100 children of different age group and different educational level is not adequate to keep them sufficiently occupied. Children need to be kept physically and mentally occupied by adopting more innovative rehabilitation therapy. This is one critical area where greater attention is needed. Reception Homes to be decentralized, children classified, help from civil society and NGOs to be obtained. More importantly childrens stagnation in the short stay home to be reduced considerably by providing adequate Probation Officers, escorts and other social work and counselling professionals. Further, these facilities could be out sourced through adequate funding to NGOs in different regions. 13. In the light of the above suggestions put before this Court as well as the amendment made to JJ Act (Central Act 33 of 2006), we hereby direct the respondent State to reconvene the meeting of the committee constituted by the order of this Court dated 211. 2005 and place the order before the Committee and get the draft Rules dated 01.02.2006 revised and approved by the Committee and thereafter, to take a decision and publish the Rules in accordance with law. 2005 and place the order before the Committee and get the draft Rules dated 01.02.2006 revised and approved by the Committee and thereafter, to take a decision and publish the Rules in accordance with law. The entire exercise shall be undertaken by the State within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This Court is of the view that since the issue has been discussed threadbare, there is no necessity to report compliance with this Court but, however, carry on the publication of the Rules and implement the same in its letter and spirit. 14. The writ petitionsare disposed of accordingly. However, there will be no order as to costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.