KEY FACTS:
Reshma Prasad filed a petition before the Patna High Court seeking the monitoring and implementation of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in NALSA v. Union of India.
ISSUES AND DECISION:
Reshma Prasad argued that the state had failed to establish integrated counselling and testing centres. This was one of the directions in the Supreme Court judgement. The Bihar State Legal Services Authority argued that it was coordinating with the State Government to implement the directions in NALSA.
The issue before the Court was whether it should monitor the implementation of the NALSA judgement in the state. The Court noted that the relevant authorities were coordinating with the government to implement the directions.
It observed that the state had established the appropriate boards and committees to ensure implementation of the directions. It also noted that the state government was organising a programme to raise awareness of children affected by HIV. Therefore, the Court held that it did not have to monitor the implementation of the Supreme Court’s directions.
SIGNIFICANCE:
Although the Court did not monitor the implementation of NALSA, it granted liberty to Reshma to pursue the matter with the secretary of NALSA and BSLSA in case any particular issue is not addressed by the authorities.