• HOME»
  • Legally Speaking»
  • Bombay High Court Directed State To Report On Appointment And Performance Of Child Marriage Prohibition Officers

Bombay High Court Directed State To Report On Appointment And Performance Of Child Marriage Prohibition Officers

The Bombay High Court in the case Child Marriage Prohibition Committee and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors observed and has directed the State Government for submitting information with regards to the appointment and performance of Child Marriage Prohibition Officers in the State. The Division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and […]

Advertisement
Bombay High Court Directed State To Report On Appointment And Performance Of Child Marriage Prohibition Officers

The Bombay High Court in the case Child Marriage Prohibition Committee and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors observed and has directed the State Government for submitting information with regards to the appointment and performance of Child Marriage Prohibition Officers in the State.

The Division bench comprising of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Arif Doctor was hearing the matter wherein the Public Interest Litigation filed by an NGO and some social activists seeking effective implementation of the Prohibition of Child Marriages Act, 2006.

The court in the case observed and has directed the Secretary, Women and Child Development Department, or a representative vetted by the Secretary, for filing an additional affidavit in order to provide the following information’s:
The number of Child Marriage Prohibition Officers, CMPOs who are appointed by the State Government across Maharashtra.

Weather it has been submitted by the officers the periodical returns and statistics on child marriages to the State Government, as it is mandated under section 16 of the Act and Rule 3 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Child Marriage Rules, 2022.

The Details of any disciplinary actions which are taken against CMPOs who have failed to perform their duties.

The Affidavit filed by the State in June, 2022 from 2018 to 2021, stated that the authorities stopped 1767 child marriages.

The court in the case observed and has noted that the affidavit filed does not explain how these figures were arrived at. Further, the affidavit filed was silent on the number of CMPOs in the state.

The court stated that as per Rules of 2022, duties of the CMPOs include preventing child marriages, collecting evidence, advising residents, creating awareness, and sensitizing the community. Therefore, the CMPOs have the authority to enter any premises where a child marriage is suspected, demand documents, and conduct inquiries, which must be completed within the period of three months.

The court stated that as per the 2022 Rules the CMPOs must report on their actions under the Act and Rules in the first week of every month. Failure to fulfil their duties shall result in disciplinary action against the CMPOs.

The court while considering the important role to be performed by the Child Marriage Prohibition Officers, it is necessary that adequate Child Marriage Prohibition Officers are appointed and strict supervision is being conducted with regards to the performance of their duties.

The present PIL was filed by Advocate Ajinkya Udane, wherein seeking Rules to be framed by the State Government as per section 19 of the Prohibition of Child Marriages Act, 2006.
It has been stated by the Government Pleader, PP Kakade that it has been notified by the government the Maharashtra Prohibition of Child Marriage Rules, 2022.

The PIL filed seeks the committee with representatives from the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Social Justice, Ministry of Education, Director General of Police, State Commission for Protection of Child Rights, State Human Rights Commission, State Commission for Women, and NGOs to frame a standard operating procedure for implementing the Act of 2006.

Further, the petitioner in the plea seeks requested the High Court to frame guidelines to make the Act of 2006 more effective.

Accordingly, the court listed the matter for further consideration on August 02, 2023.

Advertisement