SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- S.B. Sinha and S.H. Kapadia, JJ.

Writ Petition(Civil) No. 212 of 2003. D/d. 13.5.2005.

Forum, fact finding documentation and adv. - Petitioners

Versus

Union of India and Ors. - Respondents

For the Petitioners :- Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv., Ms.Aparna Bhat and Mr. P. Ramesh Kumar, Advocates.

For the Respondents :- Mr. P.P. Malhotra, ASG, Mr. Devadatt Kamat, Mrs. Rekha Pandey, Mr. T.S. Dobia, Sr. Adv., Mr. R. Mohan, ASG, Ms. Sandhya Goswami, Sushma Suri, Mr. Aruneshwar Gupta, AAG, Mr. Naveen Kumar Singh, Ms. Shivangi, Ms. A. Subhashini, Mr. Altaf H. Naiyuk, A.G., J&K, Mr. Anis Suhrawardy, Ms. Shamama Anis, Ms. Rachna Srivastava, AAG, Uttaranchal, Mr. Kh. Nobin Singh, Mr. Ranjan Mukherhjee, Mr. Kuldip Singh, Mr. H.S. Sandhu, Mr. A.K. Sinha, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Mrs. Sadhna Sandhu, Mr. H.K. Puri, Mr. Ujjwal Banerjee, Mr. S.K. Puri, Mr. Shiv Gupta, Ms. Priya Puri, Mr. V.M. Chauhan, Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Mr. Ravi P. Mehrotra, Mrs. Deepti R. Mehrotra, Mr. Garvesh Kabra, Mr. A.P. Mayee, Mr. Gopal Singh, Mr. Anurag Sharma, Mr. Rituraj Biswas, Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Mr. R. Ayyam Perumal, Mr. S. Vallinayagam, Mr. Manjit Singh, Mr. T.V. George, Mr. Manoj Saxena, Mr. M.P. Meharia, Mr. S.K. Mittra, Mr. Debojit Borkakati, Mr. B.S. Banthia, Mr. Sakesh Kumar, Mr. A. Mariarputham, Ms. Aruna Mathur, for M/s.Arputham, Aruna& Co., Ms. Pinky Anand, Mr. D.N. Gaburdhan, Mr. Rajesh Pathak, Mr.Arup Banerjee, Ms. Alka Agrawal, Mr. R.P. Mehrotra, Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Mr. V.K. Sidharthan, Mr. Riku Sarma, for M/s. Corporate Law Group, Mrs. Rekha Pandey, Mr. D.S. Mahra, Mr. U. Hazarika, Mr. Satya Mitra, Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Ms. Suparna Srivastava, Mr. Rajesh Srivastava,Mr. Kumar Rajesh Singh, Mr. B.B. Singh, Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad, Ms. Anil Katiyar, Mr. J.S. Attri, AAG, Mr. Mukesh K. Giri, Mr. Praveen Kumar Rai, Ms. Kavita Wadia, Mr. Radha Shyam Jena, Mr. Anil Shrivastava,Mr. Saurabh Shrivastava, Ms. Bano, Mr. Tara Chandra Sharma, Ms. Neelam Sharma, Mr. Gopal Prasad, Mr. Anand Shekhar, Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, Mr. T.V. Ratnam and Mr. Prakash Srivastava, Advocates.

Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - Child Marriage - Restraint Act, 1929 - Prevention of Child Marriage Bill, 2004 - Child Marriages - Public Interest Litigation filed - Court issues notice to states to file affidavit - State Human Rights Commissions constituted in each State are directed to conduct inquiries into incidences of child marriages which have allegedly taken place - National Human Rights Commission is directed to co-ordinate with State Human Rights Commission.

[Para 2]

ORDER

1. Issue notice.

2. The States of Andhra Pradesh, Chattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh shall file counter affidavits to the respective interlocutory applications filed by the petitioner within eight weeks from date. Rejoinder, if any, shall be filed within two weeks thereafter. While we do not intend to pass any further interim order as prayed for in these applications at this stage, we reiterate that the interim order dated 28th February, 2005 shall continue. We request respective State Human Rights Commissions/State Human Rights Committees constituted in each State to conduct inquiries into the incidences of child marriages which have allegedly taken place. The National Human Right Commission is also requested to coordinate with the respective Human Rights Commissions/State Human Rights Committees in this behalf.

3. Mr. Colin Gonsalves, learned senior counsel submits that the petitioner shall render necessary assistance and cooperation to the respective State Human Rights Commissions/State Human Right Committees in conducting inquiries in this behalf.

4. Put up after 10 weeks.

.