Child Welfare Committee Has No Power to Order FIR Registration: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that a Child Welfare Committee (CWC) cannot direct the police to register a First Information Report (FIR), clarifying that its authority under the Juvenile Justice Act is limited to ensuring the care and protection of children, not initiating criminal proceedings.

"This Court is of the considered opinion that the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) is only empowered to forward a report to the Juvenile Justice Board or to the concerned police authority regarding any violation of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006," the bench of Justice Chawan Prakash said.

Court was dealing with a criminal revision petition filed by one Rishi Pal and another, challenging an order passed by the Nyaypeeth Bal Kalyan Samiti (CWC), Badaun, which had directed the police to file a case under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

Revisionist Rishi Pal, father of a minor girl, lodged an FIR alleging that four men namely Tinku, Sonu, Sanju, and Sugreev, had abducted his daughter from their home in Badaun on April 6, 2021. He stated that she was later found unconscious near one of the accused’s houses. The police registered a case under Sections 363, 366, and 376(3) of the IPC and Sections 7/8 of the POCSO Act.

During the investigation, the police determined that the girl was a minor based on her school certificate, which recorded her date of birth as March 1, 2007. When she was produced before the Child Welfare Committee, Badaun, the Committee found she was pregnant and had reportedly married revisionist no. 2, Rakesh.

Taking note of her age, the Committee handed over her custody to her father but directed the police to register a fresh FIR under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, against those involved in solemnising the marriage.

Challenging this direction, the revisionists contended that the Committee had no jurisdiction to issue such directions and that the marriage was lawful, as the girl was allegedly above 18 years of age. They further submitted that only a Magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC could order the registration of an FIR in respect of a cognizable offence.

The State, on the other hand, supported the Committee’s action, stating that the medical and educational records proved the victim was a minor, approximately 14 years and eight months old at the time of the incident, and was pregnant, which justified the registration of a case under the Child Marriage Act.

After reviewing the legal provisions, the Court examined Sections 27 and 30 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which define the structure and powers of the Child Welfare Committees. Court observed that while a CWC functions as a bench and exercises powers similar to a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, these powers are confined to matters concerning children in need of care and protection, such as custody, rehabilitation, or restoration.

“It is nowhere stated that the Child Welfare Committee can direct the police for registration of an FIR in any cognizable offence,” Justice Prakash observed. He clarified that the Committee’s role is recommendatory i.e. it may forward a report or bring violations to the attention of the Juvenile Justice Board or the police, but cannot issue binding directions to lodge an FIR.

Allowing the revision, the High Court held that the Committee exceeded its jurisdiction by issuing such a directive and set aside the order dated November 30, 2021, insofar as it instructed the police to register the FIR.

Case Title: Rishi Pal And Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Order Date: October 9, 2025

Bench: Justice Chawan Prakash