Child Welfare Committee

The Child Welfare Committee is an autonomous body declared as a

competent authority to deal with children in need of care and
protection. Section 27 of Chapter V of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 talks about the Child Welfare Committee.

It is mandatory to form one or more Child Welfare Committees in every

district for exercising power and to discharge the duties conferred in relation
to children in need of care and protection. This committee consists of a
Chairperson and other four members who according to the State Government
are fit to be appointed, at least one of whom should be a woman and the
other should preferably be an expert on matters that are concerning the
children. 

A Secretary and other staff shall be provided by the District Child Protection
Unit for secretarial support to the Committee for its effective functioning. For
becoming a member of the Committee, that person(who wants to become a
member) should be actively involved in health, education and welfare
activities in relation to children for at least seven years or should be a
practising professional who has a degree in child sociology, psychiatry,
psychology, law or human development. 

For the appointment of a member, he should possess all the prescribed

qualifications. The duration of this appointment should not exceed the time
period of three years. Appointment of a member shall be terminated if that
member uses his power for wrong measures, been convicted of an offence
involving moral turpitude (where such conviction has not been reversed and
he has not been granted full pardon) and does not attend the meetings of
the Committee for a period of three months of three-fourths sitting of the
Committee in that year. A review in every three months shall be conducted
by the District Magistrate. 

The Child Welfare Committee functions as a bench guided by the powers that
are conferred in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Anyone connected to
the child is allowed to file a petition to the Magistrate of that District, who
considers and passes appropriate orders. 

Procedures in relation to the committee

The procedures in relation to the committee are mentioned in Section 28 of
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. There should
be a meeting of the Committee at least twenty days in a month for observing
rules and procedures with regards to the transaction at its business
meetings.
A sitting of the Committee is considered when there is a visit to an existing
child care institution of the Committee. A child, who is in need of care
protection and care needs to be placed in a Children’s Home or a fit person
when the Committee but is not in session, he must be produced before an
individual member of the Committee. 

The opinion of the majority shall prevail if there is any difference of opinion
between the members of the Committee.

If there is no majority of such kind then the opinion of the Chairperson shall
be considered. Subject to the provision of minimum members of the
Committee, there shall be no order made by the Committee that declares it
invalid by reason of just the absence of a member during any stage of the
proceedings that are held.

This is applicable provided that there are at least three members who need
to be there to dispose of the case finally.

Powers
The powers of the Child Welfare Committee are laid down in Section 29 of
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015:

 The Committee has the full authority of disposing of cases for the
care, protection and treatment of the children. 
 The Committee can also dispose of cases that are for the
development, rehabilitation and protection of children that are in
need, and also to provide for the basic need and protection that is
needed by the children. 
 When a Committee is constituted for any particular area, then it has
the power to exclusively deal with all proceedings that are being
held under the provisions of this Act that are related to children in
terms of need of care and protection. 
 While exercising the given powers curtailed under this Act, the
Committee is barred from performing any act which would go
against anything contained in any other law that is in force at that
time. 
In the case of Ms. Sheila Ramchandra Singh v. State of Maharashtra and
Others, a Government Circular dated 16 June 2016 was issued by the
Women and Child Development Department(Government of Maharashtra).

The said circular stated that the Child Welfare Committee of Thane
(Maharashtra) was not fully constituted and functional. By looking at the
above Circular, the charge of Thane Child Welfare Committee was handed
over to the Child Welfare Committee, Mumbai on the command of the State
Government. The Deputy Secretary of the Woman and Child Development
Department presented this in the Court.

The Court directed the Child Welfare Committee, Mumbai to take up an

application dated 4 April 2016 on a priority basis and pass appropriate orders
in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of by giving such
directions.

In the case of Krishna Kumar v. Kollam Child Welfare Committee, a writ

petition was filed by the father of Kumari Amalenthu who was a victim of a
rape case.

The court was approached by her father who contended that the child was
originally handed over to the father by the Child Welfare Committee but
later, the Committee took away the child and then that child was housed at
the Nirbhaya Shelter Home. He contended for the custody of the child as he
was the biological father. The learned Counsel had submitted that the child
had no complaint against the father.

There was no explanation as to why the child was taken to the hospital and
where the prime accused was being treated. It is true that she may like to
have an association with her biological father. Learned counsel then
submitted that the child was taken at the instance of the police and that
statement could not be believed.

In the above circumstances, the Court was of the view that the child will be
more protected when she is in the custody of the Child Welfare Committee. It
shall be open for the petitioner to approach the Child Welfare Committee and
seek for appropriate orders and therefore dismissed the writ petition.

Functions and Responsibilities

The Functions and Responsibilities of the Child Welfare Committee are
mentioned in Section 30 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015. Few functions and responsibilities are listed below:

 Cognizance of children that are produced before it. Children who are
neglected can be produced before this committee.
 Conducting inquiry on issues relating to and affecting the safety and
well being of the children under this Act.
 To direct the Child Welfare Officers, District Child Protection Unit
and Non- Governmental organizations for social investigation and
also to submit a report before the Committee.
  To conduct an inquiry for the declaration of fit persons for the care
of children in need of care and protection. 
 To direct placing of a child in a foster care facility.
 To ensure care, protection, restoration and appropriate
rehabilitation of those children that are in need of care and
protection. This is based on that child’s individual care plan. It also
includes the passing of necessary directions to parents or guardians
or the people who are fit or children’s homes or fit facilities in this
regard.
 To select a registered institution for the placement of every child
that requires support which is based on that child’s gender, age,
disability and needs. This should be done by keeping in mind the
available capacity of the institution.
 To recommend action that is for the improvement in the quality of
services provided to the District Child Protection Unit and the
Government of a State.
 To certify the performance of the surrender deed by the parents and
to make sure that they are given time to think about their decision
as well as to make a reconsideration to keep the family together.
 To make sure that all the efforts are made for the restoration of the
lost or abandoned children to their families by following due process
which is prescribed by the Act.
 To declare children legally free for adoption after due inquiry who
are orphans, abandoned and surrendered. 
 To take suo moto cognizance of cases and also to reach out to the
children who are in need of care and protection.
 To take action against the rehabilitation of children who are abused
sexually and are reported as children in need of protection and care
from the Committee, by the Special Juvenile Police Unit or the local
police as the case may be.
 To deal with cases referred by the Board under sub-section (2) of 17
of this Act.
 To coordinate with various departments that are involved in the care
and protection of children. These departments include the police,
the labour department and other agencies.
 To conduct an inquiry and give directions to the police or the District
Child Protection Unit in case of a complaint of abuse of a child.
 To access appropriate legal services for the children.
 To perform such other functions and responsibilities as may be
prescribed.
CHICHAGO SCHOOL SOCIAL DISORGANISATION THEORY:
 Key question of the Chicago School was why certain areas had higher crime rates than
others.

 Burgess organized 1920s Chicago into a series of concentric zones according to residential,
occupational, and class characteristics

 center zone- contained industries and commercial activity, had access to transportation
sources (e.g., waterways, trains). 

 Outer Zone- nicer residential areas were farthest away from this central zone—away from
the pollution, crowding, and poverty of the business district.

 zone in transition- as the major source of concern. As businesses expand into this area from
the central zone; 

 those residents who can afford to do so leave. With the stable wage earners gone, housing
deteriorates and the zone becomes an undesirable place to live

 the zone in transition hosted waves of new immigrants who were too poor to live
elsewhere. 

  City growth produced social disorganization- a weakening of the social tie that bind a
community together

  

 these ecological characteristics disrupted community organization (i.e., produced social

disorganization); they interfered with a community’s ability to organize and reach common
goals

 Social institutions, such as schools and community organizations that help to shape youth,
are difficult to establish and maintain when community members hope to leave at the first
available opportunity
once delinquency became entrenched, another process helps to keep crime rates stable. Delinquent
subcultures (gangs) developed and passed their norms and values across generations

 Clifford Shaw and Henry McKaytheir findings suggest- the characteristics of the people
living in that zone mattered less than the particular geographical area. 

 the zone in transition was home to many different waves of immigrants (e.g., German,
Irish, Polish, African American). Regardless of what ethnic group occupied the zone in
transition, their children had high rates of delinquency. 

 only certain parts of the city fostered delinquency and crime; the city was not itself
criminogenic

 outlined a number of ecological characteristics- 

 Physical decay (e.g., crumbling or abandoned buildings). 

 Population heterogeneity

 High poverty rates

High population mobility (constant movement of residents in and out of the neighborhood)

Racial discrimination also affects housing availability leading to concentrating minorities in inner city

neighborhoods.

William Julius Wilson studied blacks as “underclass”, found that racial differences in crime are due
to factors like a legacy of racism, residential segregation, loss of manufacturing jobs in the inner city,
and the failure of civil rights policies.

Intersectionality- sociological school said that intersection of race, ethnicity, and crime have
reflected disparities

SUB CULTURE THEORY:

  subculture- a group, such as a street gang, that holds norms and values different from
mainstream society. 

  Albert K. Cohen in Delinquent Boys- why delinquent subcultures (gangs) developed and why
they engaged in a particular kind of delinquency

 most gang-related juvenile delinquency was non-utilitarian, malicious, and negativistic. theft
seemed to be based on factors other than the value of stolen goods. 

 Cohen, argued that different strain produced delinquency- strain is caused by the failure of
lower-class boys to achieve middle-class status. lower-class boys desire middle-class status
but in school, they were singled out by their dress, manners, and attitudes; failed to live up
to this “middle-class measuring rod.”

 Cohen believed that different youth would react to this status frustration differently. Some
might “buck up” and achieve middle-class status by working hard and achieving in school.
Others will drop out and become “street-corner boys” 
  delinquent solution involved the creation of a subculture that valued things in direct
opposition to middle-class standards. (a response similar to Freud’s defense mechanism
reaction formation)

 because the boys cannot achieve middle-class status, they create a culture that rewards the
opposite values

Cloward and Ohlin: Differential Opportunity- delinquency is primarily aimed at obtaining wealth
through illegitimate means

serious delinquents are predisposed toward “conspicuous consumption” (e.g., fast cars, fancy
clothes, sex, drugs). Because their access to legitimate means is structurally blocked, delinquents will
resort to illegitimate means (e.g., theft, drug sales, burglary) to achieve their material goals

Just as legitimate means (e.g., education, a good job) are unequally distributed in society,
illegitimate means are also differentially (readily) available in some neighborhoods.

Differential opportunity deals with the unavailability of legitimate opportunities (blocked

opportunity creates delinquency) and the availability of illegitimate opportunities for success.

The presence or absence of illegitimate opportunity dictates the form taken by the delinquent
subculture.

 Miller views the entire lower class as a unique subculture; believes that the values of the
lower class somehow encourage deviance

 For eg- lower class places high value on street smarts and toughness. In contrast, the middle-
class values delayed gratification and restraint of aggression.

 Criticism-

 Very narrow domain- cannot account for middle-class and upper-class crimes (i.e., white-
collar crime), or female offenders.

 he essentially blames the lower class for having particular values without recognizing the
effects that concentrated poverty and pervasive joblessness may play in generating these
values

 experience of living in concentrated poverty also breeds cynicism toward social institutions