Bachpan Bachao Andolan v. Union of India & Ors
(2011) 5 SCC 1
In the Supreme Court
W.P. (C) 51/2006
Before Justice Dr Dalveer Bhandari and Justice A.K. Patnaik
Decided on April 18, 2011

Relevancy of the case: A public interest litigation filed for addressing the problem of inter-state child trafficking, child labour, and child sexual abuse in circuses

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Constitution of India, 1950 (Article 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 21A, 23, 24, 39A, 41, 43, 45, 47)
• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 67)
• The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (Section 31, 33(3))

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The petitioner approached the court in the backdrop of increasing cases of inter-state child trafficking, child labour, and child sexual abuse in circuses.
• Though some circus owners agreed to phase out children’s participation in circuses, the Indian Circus Federation’s (ICF) poor grip over its members did not yield fruitful results.
• The petitioner submitted that circus owners harass children physically, emotionally, and sexually.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel submitted that they do not wish to ban circuses completely but expect welfare measures to be put in place. The petitioner’s counsel wishes the court to direct the authorities to conduct a raid and free the children.
• The respondent’s counsel submitted that the government is acutely aware of the problem. The Ministry of Family Welfare and Child Development needs to create a new division for Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM).
• The Solicitor General argued in favour of conducting additional research to check the efficacy of the provisions of the Young Persons Harmful Publications Act, 1956, Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 293 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Opinion of the Bench

• The court acknowledged the gravity of the problem.
• It gave various directions to conduct raids, liberate children from circuses, and help formulate rehabilitation schemes for such children.

Final Decision

• The court listed the petition for further directions.

Akshita Rohatgi, an undergraduate student at the University School of Law and Legal Studies, GGSIPU, prepared this case summary during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in January/February 2021.