Introduction
The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act aims to protect children from exploitation in the workforce. To ensure strict compliance, the Act imposes specific penalties on individuals and establishments that violate its provisions. These punishments serve as a strong deterrent against the employment of children in hazardous occupations.
What Are The Penalties under Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act
The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act imposes strict penalties for employing children in prohibited occupations or processes. Anyone who employs or allows a child to work in violation of Section 3 faces serious consequences. The offender will be punished with a minimum imprisonment of three months, which may extend up to one year. A fine of at least ₹10,000, extendable to ₹20,000, may also be imposed. In some cases, the punishment can include both imprisonment and fine. If a person is convicted once and repeats the offence, the penalty becomes harsher. The law mandates a minimum imprisonment of six months, which can extend up to two years for repeat offenders.
Penalties for Other Violations
The Act also penalizes failure to comply with procedural rules:
- Not giving notice as per Section 9
- Failing to maintain proper records under Section 11 or making false entries
- Not displaying required notices under Section 12
- Violating any other provision of the Act or its rules
Such violations can lead to simple imprisonment of up to one month or a fine of up to ₹10,000. In some cases, both penalties may apply. These penalties aim to ensure strict enforcement of child labour laws and protect children from exploitation.
Landmark Case on Section 14 of the Child and Adolescent Labour Act
The Supreme Court of India dealt with a significant case concerning widespread child labour practices in hazardous industries, particularly in the fireworks sector of Tamil Nadu. This public interest litigation exposed the employment of children below 14 years of age, which was in direct violation of Section 3 of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act. The Court invoked Section 14 to enforce penal consequences on employers responsible for these violations.
The judiciary emphasized that employers who engage children in hazardous occupations must face both imprisonment and monetary penalties as mandated under Section 14. The Court ordered the initiation of criminal proceedings against such employers, ensuring that imprisonment clauses were not treated as optional. This case marked one of the first robust applications of Section 14, sending a clear message that child labour offences would attract strict punishment.
To strengthen enforcement, the Court also directed the government to establish a Child Labour Rehabilitation-cum-Welfare Fund. It further mandated that each violator deposit ₹20,000 per rescued child into this fund. The administration was instructed to facilitate school enrollment and financial aid for the affected children’s families.
This landmark judgment redefined accountability under the Child Labour Act. It reinforced that violation of Section 3 will trigger stringent action under Section 14, ensuring a deterrent against future offences. The case remains a pivotal precedent in India’s legal approach to child labour prevention.
Conclusion
The penalties under this Act highlight the seriousness of preventing child labour in India. By enforcing strict fines and imprisonment for violators, the law reinforces the nation’s commitment to safeguarding children’s rights and ensuring a safe, healthy environment for their growth and development.
