JUDGMENT
1. Heard counsel for the parties.
2. In this Writ Petition it is stated that the petitioner No. 1 Bulla Shukla, was minor when in the year 1990 she was kidnapped by some unknown persons and was found at Madhupur railway station. In connection with Madhupur Railway P.S. Case. No. 31 of 1990 she was sent to the After Care Home first at Deoghar and then at Patna. Sessions Trial No. 115 of 1991 is pending in the Court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka. It is submitted that the father of the petitioner, namely, Kartik Shukla is alive and resides at the address given in the cause title of the case. She has been sent to the After Care Home since she is a victim as also a witness in that case.
3. This Court has emphasized time without number that the mere fact that a female is a witness in a criminal case or is a victim of the offence committed by the accused is no ground for keeping her in the After Care Home if there are members of the family who can look after her. The After Care Home is meant for destitutes and not for those who can be cared for by their own family members. Unfortunately, the authorities that be tend to act In a mechanical and in a most inhuman manner by detaining those victims in jail who can get the comfort of a family life with their parents and relatives. In this case we feel that the petitioner should be sent to her home after her father Kartik Shukla is entrusted with the custody of petitioner No. 1 Bulla Shukla.
4. In these circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed with a direction to 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka to issue process against Kartik Shukla resident of Kangoi Gate, P.O. and P.S. Mihijam, District Dumka, father of petitioner No. 1, who shall be summoned and after his appearance before the Court Bulla Shukla. his daughter, may be entrusted to his custody. If any difficulty arises on account of unwillingness on the part of Kartik Shukla to take his daughter him, the matter may be reported to this Court directly. We wish to make it clear that the learned Additional Sessions Judge shall not act in a mechanical manner but must acquire human approach in such cases. If the ordinary process does not succeed in bringing to Court the father of petitioner No. 1, he shall not hesitate to issue coercive process. The respondents are directed to report compliance of this order.
5. Let a copy of this order be given to counsel for the petitioners.