On 14th December, 2016, in the case of Bachpan Bachao Andolan vs Union of India & Ors. [Writ Petition (Civil) No.906 of 2014], while addressing on the issue of drugs, alcohol and substance abuse amongst children in India, a three Judge Bench observed that “these are matters which should not be brushed under the carpet” and that the “authorities should consider how children should be sensitised (having due regard to the age and stage of the child) of the dangers of drug use, the necessity to report drug use and the need to develop resistance to prevailing peer and social pressures.”


  1. This petition has been filed in public interest (PIL) under Article 32 of the Constitution in the wake of serious violations and abuse of children who are forcefully slacken in circuses, in many occurrence, without any approach to their families under uttermost inhuman conditions.
  2. There are occurrence of sexual abuse on a daily basis, physical abuse as well as emotional abuse. The children are underprivileged of basic human needs of food and water.
  3. A contempt petition was filed in the writ petition by the petitioner on 26.04.2013,, complaining of the way in which a complaint made regarding a missing child was handled by the concerned police station.
  4. For the same case, certain directions were passed which also included additional directions for executing the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, as amended in 2006.
  5. The court passed an interim direction that when any case regarding missing children is being reported in police station, the same should be reduced into a First Information Report (FIR) and suitable steps should be taken to ensure that follow up investigations takes place immediately.
  6. But , there was an element of doubt raised by the State of Madhya Pradesh regarding the recording of the First Information Report (FIR) relating to missing child, having consider to the provisions of Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which relates to information in cognizable cases.

Issues involved:

  • Whether the writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to frame appropriate guidelines for the persons engaged in circuses be filed?


  • In order to execute the fundamental right of the children under Article 21A of the Indian Constitution it is vital that the Central Government must issue suitable notifications prohibiting the employment of children in circuses within two months from today.
  • The Respondents are directed to conduct contemporaneous raids in all the circuses to liberate the children and check the violation of fundamental rights of the children. Children to be kept in the Care and Protective Homes till they attain the age of 18 years.


  • In this present case the Article 32 of Indian constitution is applied to file a suit.
  • In this case, the solicitor general of India argued that each state government should select a person to oversee the enforcement of child-related laws. It was decided that no kid may be denied a fundamental right protected by the Indian constitution or subjected to abuse or trafficking of children.

India has made significant legal decisions regarding human trafficking. The cases are People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India; . M. C. Mehta v State of Tamil Nadu; Prerna v. State of Maharashtra, (2003); Budhadev Karmaskar v. West Bengal State, (2011)

Adv. Khanak Sharma (D/1710/2023)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This field is required.

This field is required.


The following disclaimer governs the use of this website (“Website”) and the services provided by the Law offices of Kr. Vivek Tanwar Advocate & Associates in accordance with the laws of India. By accessing or using this Website, you acknowledge and agree to the terms and conditions stated in this disclaimer.

The information provided on this Website is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered as legal advice or relied upon as such. The content of this Website is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and the Law Firm. Any reliance on the information provided on this Website is done at your own risk.

The Law Firm makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information contained on this Website.

The Law Firm disclaims all liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this Website or for any actions taken in reliance on the information provided herein. The information contained in this website, should not be construed as an act of solicitation of work or advertisement in any manner.