The direction came from a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta when senior counsel and amicus curiae Indira Jaisingh said multiplicity of authorities will lead to confusion. (File)
The Supreme Court on Friday said that the Social Welfare Department of the Chandigarh administration will be the sole authority responsible for attending to the needs of the 10-year-old rape survivor who recently gave birth to a child after being denied permission to undergo abortion on health grounds. The direction came from a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta when senior counsel and amicus curiae Indira Jaisingh said multiplicity of authorities will lead to confusion. “…there will be no multiplicity of authorities and the responsibility vests with the Director, Department of Social Welfare; there should not be any hindrance or obstruction in providing the necessary care,” the court said.
At the previous hearing, the court had asked authorities to ensure that the girl was provided medical support and counselling. On Friday, the bench added, “the support person as well as the counsellor and liasion officer appointed by the Child Welfare Committee should be in regular communication with the Child Welfare Committee as well as the Director of the Department of Social Welfare and it is not as if they should perform their responsibilities only on the asking of the parents.”
The court took note of the status report filed by member secretary of Chandigarh State Legal Services Authority Mahavir Singh. It said the girl and the newborn were being looked after with the assistance of a support person as well as a counsellor and liasion officer appointed by the Child Welfare Committee. The bench also perused the report of Government Medical College and Hospital in Chandigarh, which said the mother and child were in a “stable condition”.
Singh, meanwhile, told the court that the Chandigarh State Legal Services Authority had not been able to release financial assistance for the girl as it had not received any money from the victim compensation fund. The Chandigarh administration replied that the money had to come from the Consolidated Fund of India. The court then directed all concerned to ensure that the money reached the girl.
The bench also sought to know if the girl should be shifted from the school where she was studying. Singh said, “We had offered to put her in a new school, but the father insisted that she be sent to the same school”. Jaisingh then added that the head of the school must be requested to ensure that details about what the child underwent do not become public.
