'No Evidence Of Control Or Exploitation': Kerala High Court Quashes Child Labour Case Under Juvenile Justice Act
The Kerala High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings against the licensee of a rubber band manufacturing unit, who was booked under Sections 75 [Punishment for cruelty to child] and 79 [Exploitation of a child employee] of the Juvenile Justice Act for engaging child labourers.Justice C. Pratheep Kumar relied on the Apex Court decision in Narang S.C. v. State (2025) and the Kerala...
The Kerala High Court recently quashed the criminal proceedings against the licensee of a rubber band manufacturing unit, who was booked under Sections 75 [Punishment for cruelty to child] and 79 [Exploitation of a child employee] of the Juvenile Justice Act for engaging child labourers.
Justice C. Pratheep Kumar relied on the Apex Court decision in Narang S.C. v. State (2025) and the Kerala High Court decision in Nizamudhin A. v. Station House Officer (2017) to come to the conclusion that from the facts, the offences alleged were not made out against the petitioner.
The prosecution's allegation was that the accused persons 2 and 3 brought twelve children from Jharkhand and Bihar and engaged them for labour and subjected them to work in an unsafe environment in the rubber band manufacturing unit conducted by the 1st accused/petitioner.
The petitioner argued that the allegations in the final report do not make out a case against him for the offences alleged. He stated that though he is the licensee of the unit, the same is managed by the other accused, who had engaged the child labourers.
The Court referred to Sections 75 and 79 of the JJ Act as well as the aforesaid decisions and observed:
“in order to attract the offence under Section 75 J.J.Act, it is to be proved that the accused was in actual charge of the child or control over the child. Further, in order to attract the offence under Section 79 J.J. Act, the child should have been kept in bondage by the accused or the earnings of the child should have been used by the accused, for his own purpose.”
The Court then looked into the final report and the statements given by the child witnesses/children alleged to have been engaged for labour by the accused.
It found that as per the final report, the children were engaged by the accused persons 2 and 3, not the petitioner. From the children's statements, it was also found that they were brought to Kerala either by their parents or by the 3rd accused and thereafter, engaged for labour by the 2nd accused. Since the children were not under the control of the petitioner, the Court thought that Section 75 JJ Act would not be attracted in the case.
The Court further remarked that the minors did not make any statements regarding harassment or non-payment of wages or any other problem, including bonded labour, at their workplace, except for the chemicals causing allergies. Thus, it was found that the offence under Section 79 JJ Act is not made out.
Finding that neither of the offences was made out, the Court felt it fit to allow the petition and quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner alone.
Case No: Crl.M.C. No. 8111 of 2025
Case Title: Jissy S. v. State of Kerala
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 730
Counsel for the petitioner: Jacob Sebastian, Shamseera C. Ashraf, Winston K.V., Anu Jacob, Anjana Krishnan
Counsel for the respondent: Vipin Narayan – Sr. Public Prosecutor