[op-ed snap] Left out, abused: on the state of child care institutions



From UPSC perspective, the following things are important:

Prelims level: Basic aspects of JJ Act, NCPCR.

Mains level: The newscard discusses issues, related to the Child Care Institutions(CCIs)/Homes, in a brief manner.


  • The study of the Mapping Exercise of the Child Care Institutions(CCIs)/Homes throws light on a critical component of the Juvenile Justice System i.e. functioning of CCIs/Homes across the country, in the context of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and the Rules framed there under.


  1. The Juvenile Justice Act’s Section 66 mandates a CCI to get registered in the state where it functions even if it has not been recognized as Specialized Adoption Agency (SAA).
  2. A CCI is required to ensure all orphans; abandoned or surrendered children under its care are reported, produced and declared legally free for adoption.
  3. The CCIs are supposed to develop formal linkages with nearby SAA and furnish details of the children declared legally free for adoption. Violation of Section 66 invites 50,000 penalty.

Insight Given by Central government committee

  1. It studied 9,589 Child Care Institutions and Homes, mostly run by NGOs, that come under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.
  2. Only an emergency measure to address the serious lacunae can bring some semblance of order to these faceless shelters.
  3. Most of the inmates are orphaned, abandoned, sexually abused, trafficked or victims of disasters and conflict. Among them are 7,422 children in conflict with the law, and 3,70,227 in need of care and protection, including 1,70,375 girls.
  4. That they often have to live in facilities without proper toilets, secure compounds or the opportunity to vent their grievances as provided for under law underscores the painful reality that they remain virtually invisible.
  5. As per the recently disclosed study, only 32% of Child Care Institutions or Homes were registered under the JJ Act as of 2016, while an equal number were unregistered, and the rest were either empanelled under other schemes or awaiting registration.
  6. Some States obviously have too few homes, giving authorities little incentive to take up cases of children in distress. Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Kerala together account for 43.5% of all shelters.
  7. A few States do not have even one home of every category, such as child care, observation and adoption.
  8. The Ministry’s study lays bare the disconnect between civil society and the welfare system for children, and the poor engagement elected representatives have with such a vital function.

Way Forward

  1. Reform of this depressing system, as the Ministry of Women and Child Development seeks, can be achieved only through systematic scrutiny by State governments.
  2. This could be done by appointing special officers whose task it would be to ensure that all institutions register under the JJ Act, account for funds received by each, and enforce mandatory child protection policies during adoption.
  3. The priority should be to bring about uniformity of standards and procedures, evolving common norms for infrastructure, human resources, financial practices and external audits.
  4. The imperative now is to turn the findings of the Ministry’s committee into a blueprint for action. Credentialed NGOs should take a greater interest in this effort, holding the authorities to account.
  • Subscribe

    Do not miss important study material

Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
Notify of