Chapter 3: Institutional Roles and Mechanisms
3.1 Child Rights and Welfare Overview: Explains the High Court’s authority under Article 226 (Writ of Mandamus and Continuing Mandamus) to compel State Governments to constitute functional Child Welfare Committees and State Commissions for Protection of Child Rights, enforcing the mandatory provisions of the JJ Act and CPCR Act as extensions of Article 21.
3.2 Child Welfare Committees (CWCs): Details the State Government’s statutory duties under the JJ Act to constitute CWCs for every district, establish and regulate child-care institutions, appoint Chairpersons and members through a Selection Committee, frame State Rules, appoint WCD Directors/Commissioners, and manage District Child Protection Units.
3.3 Protection of Child Rights: Outlines the State Government’s power to constitute the SCPCR under the CPCR Act, its quasi-judicial monitoring and investigative functions, authority to recommend prosecution or remedial action, and mandate to review government policies while ensuring legislative oversight through annual reports.
3.4 Family Courts: Jurisdiction and Function: Summarises High Court directions under Article 227 and the Family Courts Act requiring Family Courts to prioritise the paramountcy of the child’s welfare, exhaust conciliation and mediation, implement detailed shared-parenting and visitation schedules in child-friendly settings, and adopt simplified, time-bound inquisitorial procedures.
3.5 High Court of a State: Supervisory Role: Describes the High Court’s parens patriae jurisdiction to enforce the Best-Interest standard, promote Equal Shared Parenting and 50/50 time-sharing, remediate parental alienation, supervise enforcement of visitation orders, and compel executive action on non-functional CWCs or SCPCRs.
3.6 Role of the Lawyer in Custody Litigation: Advocates reducing mandatory lawyer involvement through direct parental access via simplified forms, mandatory preliminary counselling/mediation, inquisitorial child-centric hearings, court facilitators, strict timelines, and limited legal representation only in exceptional cases, while retaining oversight mechanisms to protect the child’s best interests.
3.7 Functional Autonomy of the NCPCR: Analyses the conflict arising from the NCPCR’s administrative subordination to the Ministry of Women and Child Development, and proposes elevating it to a quasi-judicial constitutional body with independent funding from the Consolidated Fund and bipartisan appointments to ensure genuine monitoring independence.