LexBUDHADEV KARMASKAR versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2011] 10 S.C.R. 577 BUDHADEV KARMASKAR v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL (Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2010) AUGUST 24, 2011 [MARKANDEY KAT JU AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.] Sex workers - Rehabilitation of - Court appointed Panel A B on Sex Workers - Portion of the Indian Law Institute Building allotted to the Panel - Central Government directed to provide C to the Panel Ten ~khs while each State Government and each Union Territory directed to provide to the Panel Rs. 5 lakhs and Rs. 2 lakhs respectively - However, States/Union Territories which have no sex workers as stated in their affidavits need not make this payment - Each State o Government to undertake survey through their Agencies in collaboration with the Central Government n the lines as recommended by the Panel to ascertain as to how many sex workers want rehabilitation and how many of them voluntarily continue in the same profession - Results of the surverys be E reported to the Panel - If an incident of involvement of the family of the girl pushing her into the sex racket comes to notice of anyone concerned including NGOs, authorities, etc., such incident be reported to the Executive Chairman/ Secretary of the State Legal Services Authority - It will be F open for the said Authority to take appropriate penal action against such illegality or person who may be found involved - All State Legal Services Authorities to provide a helpline number to the NGOs and to the State machinery as well as to the sex workers and victims of sex trade who are in distress and who are compelled to continue with the sex trade, so that G they can avail the benefit of the helpline number for legal assistance, to get them rescued or any other assistance which may be offered to them by waty of Free Legal Aid - Approach 577 H1 578. SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011) '10 S.C.R. A of the State of West Bengal, where the problem is most acute, is disappointing - Calcutta has a huge number of sex workers in Sonagachi, Free School Street etc. - Providing short stay homes to sex workers is hardly a solution to their problem - They must be provided a marketable technical skill so that B they can earn their livelihood through such technical skill instead of by selling their bodies - As regards Delhi there seems to be no scheme of the Government for rehabilitation of sex workers - There are many red light areas such at the one in G.B. Road etc. in Delhi - UJWALA Scheme makes it c clear that the Central Government has scheme only for rescued trafficked women but no scheme for those sex workers who voluntarily want to leave the sex trade - Proper effective scheme should be prepared for such women also - Central Government scheme has placed a condition that the rescued 0 sex workers must stay in a corrective home in order to get technical training - No such condition should be imposed as many sex workers are reluctant to stay in these corrective homes which they consider as virtual prison - Central Government and State Governments to submit additional reports stating in greater- detail how they they are complying E with orders of this Court - Appeal to public, and particularly to the youth of the country to contact members of the Panel and give their valuable suggestions and inputs - Further directions issued for ensuring compliance of Court orders - F Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 21. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2011. From the Judgment & Order dated 25.07.2007 of the High G Court of Calcutta in CRA No. 487 of 2004. H Solicitor General of India, Pradip Ghosh, Jayant Bhushan T.S. Doabia, Ashok Bhan, A. Mariarputham, AG, Dr. Manish Singhvi, Shail Kr. Dwivedi, Manjit Singh, S.V. Madhukar, AAG, Piyush K Roy, Rebbeca George, Gautam Talikar, Lalla Ram, BUDHADEV KARMASKAR v. STATE OF WEST 579 BENGAL Gaurav Sharma, Sushma Suri, Anjani Aiyagari, Anil Katiyar, A . Sadhana Sandhu, Mohd, Khairati, D.S. Mahra, lrshad Ahmad, Vijay Verma, Anitha Shenoy, Ashutosh Sharma, Alka Sinha, Anuvrat Sharma, Anil Katiyar, Hemantika Wahi, Nupur Kanujuo Suveni, Mahesh Babu, Ramesk Allanki, Savita Dhanda, Ranjan Mozumbar (for Corporate Law Group), Anil Shrivastav, B Rituraj Biswas, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar, S. Wasim A. Quadiri, A.J. Faisal Banerjee, Tarjit Singh, Kamal Mohan Gupta, Abhishek Sood, Rohit Kr. Singh, Sunil Fernandes, Suhaas R. Joshi, Astha Sharma, P.V. Dinesh, Liz Mathew, Jogy Scaria, Sanjay V. Kh
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.