Zohra Sheikh vs State
2016 Latest Caselaw 2810 Del

#17
*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                                                Date of Decision: 18th April, 2016
+        BAIL APPLN. 272/2009

         ZOHRA SHEIKH                                       ..... Petitioner
                            Through      None

                            versus

         STATE                                            ..... Respondent
                            Through      Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the State

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. (ORAL)

Crl. MA No. 17815/2015

1. None appears on behalf of the non-applicant on the second call. There

was no appearance on behalf of the non-applicant on the first call either.

2. Mr. Jitendra Sethi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the non-

applicant-Zohra Sheikh had on an earlier occasion sought time to obtain

instructions from the latter. No response in this behalf has been forthcoming.

3. The present application filed on behalf of the State seeks modification of

the order dated 24th April, 2009 passed by this Court in Bail Application No.

272/2009. By way of the said order dated 24 th April, 2009, this Court observed

as follows:-

"1. Pursuant to the order dated 17th April 2009 passed by this Court an affidavit has been filed by the Deputy Director (Child Welfare), department of Women and Child Development, Govt. of NCT of Delhi dated 24th April 2009. The said affidavit is taken on record.

2. In the said affidavit it is stated that the enquiry was made by the Child Welfare Committee ( CWC ) with the children who expressed their unwillingness to move out from their present residence. The Department thereafter has taken up the matter with the Child Guidance Clinic ( CGC ) at the Jamia Milia Islamia University Campus at Okhla, New Delhi to provide proper counseling and guidance to these children and to provide psychological and therapeutic support. A Welfare Officer has been deputed by the CWC to assist the children.

3. The affidavit states that the Department is also willing to provide meals to the children at their present residence, in case they refuse to shift to the institution run by the Department.

4. In view of the statement made already by the children expressing unwillingness to shift from their present abode, it is directed that the Department will, in terms of the aforesaid statement, arrange to provide meals to the children at their residence without further delay.

5. It is further submitted that the CWC has been requested to take up the matter with the school authorities, for granting temporary relief by exempting or deferring the payment of arrears of school fees. Given the peculiar facts of the present case as noticed by the CWC, it is directed that GNCTD should itself will pass necessary orders either waiving the fees or paying to the school authorities the fees which are stated to be the arrears. The current fees will also continue to be paid by the GNCTD till such time the Petitioner is able to have access to her bank accounts. It is made clear that this order is passed in the special facts of the present case and is not intended to be constitute a precedent.

6. The Petitioner has sent a letter from the jail stating that her lawyer Mr. Sanjeev Kumar who appears for her before the learned trial court should represent her in this Court. Issue court

notice to Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate, returnable on 21st May 2009. It is requested that Mr. Sumeet Verma, learned Advocate nominated by the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee will continue to assist the Court in the matter.

7. This order is passed in the presence of Mr. P.P. Dhar, Joint Director, Social Welfare Department, GNCTD who states that the Department will immediately implement this order.

8. List on 21st May 2009.

9. A certified copy of this order be delivered to the Secretary, Social Welfare Department, GNCTD without delay. A copy of order be also delivered to the Petitioner through the Jail Superintendent forthwith."

4. The limited relief prayed for by way of the present application is that the

grant being disbursed by the State in favour of the eldest child of the non-

applicant-Zohra Sheikh in pursuance to the said order dated 24 th April, 2009 be

discontinued in view of the circumstance that he has attained majority and is

currently more than 22 years of age.

5. The said modification is necessitated in view of a notification dated 13th

August, 2014 issued by the Department of Women and Child Development

which mandates in clause 5 thereof as follows:-

"5. Quantum of Financial Assistance - The quantum of Financial Assistance to a child shall be fixed as Rs. 3,500/- for the first child, additional Rs. 3,000/- for the second child (in case of 3 or more children, this maximum amount of Rs. 6,500/- shall be utilized for welfare of all children) till he/she attains the age of 18 years or parent(s) is/are released from incarceration whichever is earlier."

6. A plain reading of the said clause 5 of the notification dated 13 th August,

2014 would reveal that the said provision postulates the continuance of financial

assistance to a 'child' in terms of the said notification inter alia only till he

attains the age of 18 years.

7. In view of the foregoing, the present application seeking modification is

partially allowed.

8. The State need not henceforth provide financial assistance to the eldest

child of the non-applicant- Zohra Sheikh, since he is stated to have attained

adulthood and is 22 years of age at this point of time.

9. With the above directions, the application is disposed of.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J APRIL18, 2016 sd