http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: GAURAV JAIN

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT15/11/1989

BENCH: MISRA RANGNATH BENCH: MISRA RANGNATH VENKATACHALLIAH, M.N. (J) SAWANT, P.B.

CITATION:  1990 AIR  292            1989 SCR  Supl. (2) 173  1990 SCC  Supl.  709     JT 1989 (4)   315  1989 SCALE  (2)1126

ACT:     Constitution of India, 1950: Article 32--Public interest litigation--School     admission     for     children     of prostitutes--Plea for separate schools and  hostels--Reject- ed--Committee set up to examine all aspects of the  problems and to submit report.

HEADNOTE:     This writ petition has been filed pleading for  separate schools and hostels for the children of prostitutes.     On  behalf of respondents, it was contended  that  since they  are in fact unwanted children of prostitutes it is  in the interest of such children and the society at large  that they  are  segregated from their mothers and be  allowed  to mingle with others and become part of the society.     Setting  up a Committee consisting of 4 Advocates and  3 Social Workers to look into the matter and directing listing of  the  matter on receipt of the Committee’s  report,  this Court.     HELD: 1. Children of prostitutes should not be permitted to  live  in  inferno and the  undesirable  surroundings  of prostitute  homes. This is particularly so for  young  girls whose body and mind are likely to be abused with growing age for  being  admitted into the profession of  their  mothers. While  separate schools and hostels for prostitute  children are not desirable, accommodation in hostels and other refor- matory  homes  should be adequately made available  to  help segregation  of these children from their mothers living  in prostitute  homes  as soon as they  are  identified.  [174H; 175A-B]     2. The Committee now set up will look into the  problems and submit its report within 8 weeks. [175D]     [This Court directed the Ministry of Welfare, Deptt.  of Women  &  Child Development functioning under the  Union  of India to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000 within two weeks to meet the expenses of the Committee]. 174

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

JUDGMENT:     CIVIL  ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil)  No. 824 of 1988. (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)     V.C.  Mahajan,  Gaurav Jain, and Ms. Abha Jain  for  the Petitioner.     Anil  Dev Singh, I. Makwana, Rathin Das,  K.R.  Nambiar, Ms. A. Subhashini, A.M. Khanvilkar, A.S. Bhasme, R.K. Mehta, V. Krishnamurthy, S.K. Agnihotri, A.V. Rangam, Mahabir Singh and P.K. Pillai for the Respondents. The Order of the Court was delivered by     MISRA, J. This application under Art. 32 of the  Consti- tution is at the instance of an advocate by way of a  public interest litigation asking for direction to the  respondents for  making  provision of separate schools  with  vocational training  facilities  and separate hostels for  children  of prostitutes.  Notice  was issued not only  to  the  original respondents but at the instance of the Court also to a11 the States and the Union Territories. Many of them have respond- ed  and affidavits have been filed by way of return  to  the rule nisi.     Though  Mr. Mahajan for the petitioner has pleaded  that separate  schools and hostels be raised for the children  of the  prostitutes, we are not inclined to accept the  submis- sion.  Segregating prostitute children by locating  separate schools  and  providing separate hostels,  in  our  opinion, would  not be in the interest of such children. It  is  said that prostitutes do not want to have children and ordinarily when children are born to them it is inspite of their desire not  to  rear children. But once such children are  born  to them, it is in the interest of such children and of  society at  large that the children of prostitutes should be  segre- gated  from  their  mothers and be allowed  to  mingle  with others  and  become part of the society.  In  fact,  counsel appearing for several States have stated at the Bar the same way. We, therefore, reject the prayer for locating  separate schools and hostels for children of the prostitutes.     Children of prostitutes should, however, not be  permit- ted  to live in inferno and the undesirable surroundings  of prostitute homes. This 175 is  particularly so for young girls whose body and mind  are likely to be abused with growing age for being admitted into the profession of their mothers. While we do not accept  the plea  for  separate hostels for prostitute  children  it  is necessary that accommodation in hostels and other reformato- ry homes should be adequately available to help  segregation of  these children from their mothers living  in  prostitute homes as soon as they are identified.     Legislation  has been brought to  control  prostitution. Prostitution has, however, been on the increase and what was once restricted to certain areas of human habitation has now spread into several localities. The problem has,  therefore, become  one of serious nature and requires considerable  and effective attention.     We  are  of the view that instead of disposing  of  this writ  petition with a set of directions, a Committee  should be constituted to examine the material aspects of the  prob- lem  and submit a report containing recommendations  to  the Court  on the basis of which further orders can be made.  We accordingly  direct that a Committee for such purpose  shall be  set  up  and it shall examine the  matter  from  various angles of the problem taking into consideration the  differ- ent laws relevant to the matter and place its report  before the  Court within eight weeks from now. The Committee  shall

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

consist of:    1. Mr. V.C. Mahajan, Senior Advocate, New Delhi.    2. Mr. R.K. Jain, Senior Advocate, New Delhi.      Mr. M.N. Shroff,      Advocate-on-Record,             He shall act as the      New Delhi.                      convenor.    4. Mr. R.K. Mehta, Advocate-on-Record, New Delhi.    5. Dr. Deepa Das,       Women’s Studies & Development       Centre, Chhatra Marg, University       of Delhi, Delhi- 110 007. 176    6. Smt. Sarla Mudgal,       Kalyani,       5030, Kalidas Marg,       Darya Ganj,       New Delhi- 110 002.    7. Smt. Krishna Mukherji,        All Bengal Women’s Union,        Research & Development Committee,        89, Elliott Road,        Calcutta-700 016.     The  Union of India in the Ministry of Welfare,  Depart- ment of Women & Child Development is directed to deposit  in this  Court  a sum of Rs.20,000 for the present  within  two weeks to meet the expenses.     The matter shall be listed on 16th January, 1990  (Tues- day) for further orders after the report is received. G.N. 177