Supreme Court of India
M.S. PATTERversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS
- Citation
- 2025 INSC 1115
- Decided
- 12 September 2025
- Disposal
- Directions issued
- Bench
- B PARDIWALA
Holding
The Supreme Court held that the respondents have substantially complied with the High Court's directions, but mandated comprehensive, uniform reforms for all beggars' homes to fulfill the constitutional right to life with dignity.
Summary
The case arose from a cholera outbreak and deaths at the Lampur Beggars' Home in Delhi, allegedly caused by contaminated water and poor sanitation. The petitioner filed a public interest litigation seeking accountability, compensation, and systemic reforms, which the Delhi High Court partially addressed but later dismissed a follow‑up application without a reasoned order. The Supreme Court examined whether the State had fulfilled its constitutional duty under Article 21 and the Directive Principles to provide dignified, hygienic living conditions in beggars' homes. It held that the State had largely complied with the High Court's directions and that extensive reforms had been implemented, but emphasized the need for uniform, nationwide standards. Consequently, the Court issued comprehensive directives for preventive healthcare, infrastructure, nutrition, vocational training, legal aid, and oversight across all beggars' homes in India, and ordered the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to frame model guidelines.
Issues considered
- The State's obligation under Article 21 and the Directive Principles to ensure humane conditions in beggars' homes.
- Whether the Delhi High Court's dismissal of the petitioner's application complied with principles of natural justice.
- The adequacy of remedial measures taken by the respondents to address the cholera outbreak and related deficiencies.
- The need for uniform national standards and guidelines for beggars' homes across States and Union Territories.
Legislation cited
- Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Begging Act, 1977
- Assam Prevention of Begging Act, 1964
- Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959
- The Bengal Vagrancy Act, 1943
- The Bihar Prevention of Beggary Act, 1951
- The Goa, Daman and Diu Prevention of Begging Act, 1972
- The Gujarat Prevention of Begging Act, 1959
- The Haryana Prevention of Beggary Act, 1971
- The Himachal Pradesh Prevention of Beggary Act, 1979
- The Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Beggary Act, 1960
- The Karnataka Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975
- The Madhya Pradesh Biksha Vritti Nivaran Adhiniyam, 1973
- The Punjab Prevention of Beggary Act, 1971
- The Sikkim Prohibition of Beggary Act, 2004
- The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Begging Act, 1945
- The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975
Headnote
Issue for Consideration Reforms in Beggars’ Homes. Headnotes† Reforms in Beggars’ Homes – Constitution of India – Art.21 – Right to dignity, health, shelter, privacy and humane treatment – Present case arose out of a grave and unfortunate incident at the where contamination of the drinking and cooking water with coliform bacteria resulted in an outbreak of cholera and gastroenteritis among the inmates leading to multiple deaths and widespread illness, exposing serious lapses in sanitation, hygiene, and healthcare facilities within the
Subjects
Beggars’ HomesReforms in Beggars’ HomesInmates of Beggars’ HomesSocial justiceArticle 21 of Constitution of IndiaArticles 38, 39(e), 41, 47 of Constitution of IndiaDirective Principles of State PolicyIndigent personsWater contaminationCholeraGastroenteritisSanitationHygieneHealthcare facilitiesPreventive HealthcareNutritionFood SafetyVocational TrainingRehabilitationDirections by Supreme Court
Judgment
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 895 : 2025 INSC 1115
M.S. Patter
v.
State of NCT of Delhi and Others
(Civil Appeal No(s). 11796-11797 of 2025)
12 September 2025
[J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Reforms in Beggars’ Homes.
Headnotes†
Reforms in Beggars’ Homes – Constitution of India – Art.21 –
Right to dignity, health, shelter, privacy and humane treatment –
Present case arose out of a grave and unfortunate incident
at the Beggars’ Home, Lampur (Narela), New Delhi where
contamination of the drinking and cooking water with coliform
bacteria resulted in an outbreak of cholera and gastroenteritis
among the inmates leading to multiple deaths and widespread
illness, exposing serious lapses in sanitation, hygiene, and
healthcare facilities within the institution – Appellant filed PIL,
disposed of by High Court vide order dtd.15.10.2001 directing
the respondents inter alia to complete the measures for making
the Homes more habitable, in line with the recommendations of
the fact-finding committee – Appellant filed application seeking
implementation thereof – High Court without going into the
merits or passing a reasoned order, merely disposed of the
application, granting liberty to the appellant to approach the
appropriate forum if still aggrieved – Challenge to:
Held: 1.1 Since the inception of the present proceedings, series of
directions were issued from time to time for improving the conditions
prevailing in Beggars’ Homes – Directions by and large complied
by the concerned authorities, resulting in tangible improvement
in infrastructure, health facilities, diet, sanitation, and the overall
living conditions of the inmates – Thus, respondents have duly
complied with the order of the High Court dtd.15.10.2001 in its
entirety. [Paras 22, 22.18]
* Author
896 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
1.2 States and Union Territories need to institutionalise similar reforms
in Beggars’ Homes and analogous institutions under their control, so
that the constitutional guarantee of life with dignity is meaningfully
secured for this most vulnerable section of society. [Para 23]
1.3 Comprehensive directions issued in respect of all Beggars’
Homes across the country including the subject institutions, w.r.t
Preventive Healthcare and Sanitation; Infrastructure and capacity;
Nutrition and Food Safety; Vocational Training and Rehabilitation;
Legal Aid and Awareness; Child and Gender Sensitivity;
Accountability and Oversight; Implementation and Compliance –
Directions to be implemented within six months from the date of
this judgment – Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment to
frame and notify model guidelines, within three months, to facilitate
uniform implementation of the aforesaid directions across all States
and Union Territories – Copy of this judgment to be circulated to
the Chief Secretaries of all States and Union Territories, Secretary,
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India,
for strict compliance – Social justice – Directions by Supreme
Court. [Paras 23, 23.1, 23.2]
Constitution of India – Art.21 – Directive Principles of State
Policy – Arts.38, 39(e), 41, 47 – State’s duty towards indigent
persons, affirmative and non-derogable – Need for judicial
intervention, why – Failure to ensure humane conditions in
beggars’ homes is a constitutional breach of the fundamental
right to life with dignity, thereby inviting judicial intervention –
Treatment of the indigent persons historically vis-à-vis Indian
Constitutional framework post 1950 – Role of Beggars’
Homes – Social justice. [Paras 16-16.7]
Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959, as extended to the
National Capital Territory of Delhi – Scope, ambit and purpose.
[Paras 17, 17.3-17.5]
Case Law Cited
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Brahm Datt Sharma and Another [1987] 2
SCR 444 : (1987) 2 SCC 179; Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator,
Union Territory of Delhi [1981] 2 SCR 516 : (1981) 1 SCC 608;
Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, In Re [2016] 1 SCR 1090 :
(2016) 3 SCC 700 – referred to.
Harsh Mander v. Union of India, AIR 2018 Del 188 – referred to.
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 897
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
List of Acts
Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959; Andhra Pradesh
Prevention of Begging Act, 1977; Assam Prevention of Begging Act,
1964; The Bihar Prevention of Beggary Act, 1951; The Goa, Daman
and Diu Prevention of Begging Act, 1972; The Madhya Pradesh
Biksha Vritti Nivaran Adhiniyam, 1973; The Gujarat Prevention
of Begging Act, 1959; The Haryana Prevention of Beggary Act,
1971; The Himachal Pradesh Prevention of Beggary Act, 1979;
The Punjab Prevention of Beggary Act, 1971; The Uttar Pradesh
Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975; The Karnataka Prohibition of
Beggary Act, 1975; The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Begging Act,
1945 (earlier known as The Madras Prevention of Begging Act,
1945); The Sikkim Prohibition of Beggary Act, 2004; The Bengal
Vagrancy Act, 1943; The Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Beggary
Act, 1960.
List of Keywords
Beggars’ Homes; Reforms in Beggars’ Homes; Inmates of
Beggars’ Homes; Social justice; Article 21 of Constitution of
India; Articles 38, 39(e), 41, 47 of Constitution of India; Directive
Principles of State Policy; Indigent persons; Water contamination;
Cholera; Gastroenteritis; Sanitation; Hygiene; Healthcare facilities;
Preventive Healthcare; Nutrition; Food Safety; Vocational Training;
Rehabilitation; Directions by Supreme Court.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No(s). 11796-
11797 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 08.07.2003 of the High Court
of Delhi at New Delhi in CWP Nos. 3118 of 2000 and 11595 of 2002
Appearances for Parties
Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv., Sanjay Kapur, Amicus Curiaes.
Advs. for the Appellant:
Dr. Brahm Dutt, Surya Kant, Ms. Priyanka Tyagi.
Advs. for the Respondents:
V.V.V. Pattabhiram, Shreekant Neelappa Terdal.
898 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
R. Mahadevan, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Aggrieved by the order dated 08.07.2003 passed by the High Court
of Judicature at Delhi1, in C.M. No. 11595 of 2002 in CWP No. 3118
of 2000, the appellant has preferred the present appeal. By the
impugned order, the High Court, without passing a speaking order,
disposed of the said application by granting liberty to the appellant
to approach the appropriate forum for redressal, if he remained
dissatisfied with the steps taken by the respondents in compliance
with the High Court’s earlier order dated 15.10.2001 in CWP No.
3118 of 2000.
3. Originally, the appellant instituted a Public Interest Litigation, CWP No.
3118 of 2000, after coming across an article published in the Hindi
daily Rashtriya Sahara on 17.05.2000 under the caption “Dozens of
Beggars suffering from Cholera and Gastroenteritis and around 50
of them, admitted in Hospital”. The news item further reported that
107 patients suffering from gastroenteritis had been admitted to the
Maharishi Valmiki Infectious Diseases Hospital, Kingsway Camp,
Delhi. These patients had been brought from the Beggars’ Home
at Lampur (Narela) and were identified as suffering from cholera.
4. It was further stated in the writ petition that on 19.05.2000, another
news item appeared in the Hindi daily Dainik Jagran, reporting that
six inmates of the Beggars’ Home at Lampur (Narela) had died, and
that a magisterial inquiry had been ordered by the Chief Minister
of Delhi. On the same day, Rashtriya Sahara published another
report stating that the condition of several beggars suffering from
gastroenteritis remained serious. The Hindustan Times, an English
daily, also reported on 19.05.2000 that the Chief Minister had ordered
a magisterial inquiry, and that various departments of the Delhi
Government were accusing one another of negligence in this matter.
1 Hereinafter referred to as “the High Court”
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 899
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
5. According to the appellant, the Minister of Social Welfare, Government
of NCT of Delhi, issued a statement – allegedly by suppressing
material facts – in order to shirk responsibility, claiming that all the
beggars had died natural deaths. This statement was reported in
Rashtriya Sahara on 20.05.2000. On the same day, The Times of
India reported that six inmates of the Beggars’ Home had died of
cholera. On 23.05.2000, Rashtriya Sahara carried another report
stating that the Municipal Commissioner of Delhi had confirmed the
death of eight beggars in the Beggars Home. The Superintendent
of the Certified Institution, Lampur (Narela), however, denied that
such deaths had occurred in the home.
6. It was also stated in the writ petition that further reports appeared
on 30.05.2000 in both Rashtriya Sahara (Hindi) and The Hindustan
Times (English), indicating, inter alia, that the magisterial probe initially
entrusted to SDM Shri J.K. Jain had been disregarded, and that a
fresh probe had been initiated by the Additional District Magistrate
of North-West District, Delhi. These reports also mentioned that a
Pakistani national had escaped from the Beggars’ Home, and that
his confinement there, instead of in jail, was itself a mystery. The
articles described the Delhi Government’s claims of improvement
in the Beggars’ Home as “a bundle of lies” asserting that a large
number of the beggars were, in fact, destitute.
7. Alleging that the authorities were misleading the public and concealing
the real facts and figures concerning the loss of valuable lives, and
further contending that citizens of India – whether free, confined, or
detained in jail – are entitled to live dignified lives as guaranteed
under Article 21 of the Constitution, and that the inmates of the
Beggars’ Home are equally entitled to such protection, the appellant
approached the High Court seeking the following reliefs:
(i) A writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus under
Article 226 of the Constitution directing the respondents to fix
responsibility upon those accountable for the deaths of the
inmates in the Beggars’ Home;
(ii) Directions to the respondents to grant compensation to the
dependents of the inmates who died in the Beggars’ Home, at
the rate of at least Rs.5,00,000/- per head;
(iii) Appropriate orders to punish, in accordance with law, the
respondents or their subordinates found responsible, severally
and jointly; and
900 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
(iv) Such further orders or directions as the Hon’ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
8. During the pendency of the petition, the Additional District Magistrate
(ADM) submitted his report to the Government on 01.06.2000,
concluding that the deaths of inmates were primarily attributable to
the consumption of water from hand-pumps, for which the Beggars’
Home authorities as well as the Public Works Department (Civil)
were mainly responsible. On the other hand, the Superintendent
of Beggars’ Home, by letter dated 15.07.2000 addressed to the
National Human Rights Commission, asserted that all the deaths in
the Beggars’ Home were natural deaths.
9. By order dated 28.11.2000, the High Court directed the committee
already appointed in CWP. No. 667/1997 [Som Datt and others v. NCT
of Delhi and others] to visit the Lampur Beggars’ Home Complex and
Tahirpur Shahdara Beggars’ Home, ascertain the conditions prevailing
therein, and submit a report, besides finding out the reasons for the
death of beggars in Lampur Beggars’ Home. The respondents filed
their reply, setting out the remedial measures taken to improve the
conditions in the Beggars’ Home, but without effectively contradicting
the alleged causes of disease and death. After inquiry, the committee
submitted its interim report dated 09.01.2001. The appellant filed
a rejoinder affidavit reiterating the facts stated in the writ petition.
10. Taking note of the affidavits and the committee’s report, the High Court
disposed of the writ petition, by order dated 15.10.2001, the relevant
paragraphs of which are reproduced below, for better appreciation:
“An affidavit has been filed by Mr. N. Diwakar, Director,
Department of Social Welfare dated 5th January, 2001
annexing the death certificates of various beggars detained
at Lampur. The cause of death is mentioned as Cardio
Respiratory failure. A brief fact finding Administrative Report
has been filed by the SDM, Narela about the death of
six beggars in the Lampur home. The report shows that
there was contamination in the water supply and it did not
measure up to the hygienic standards. It was also found that
the chlorinator plant was not functioning and the chlorine
was never checked for maintenance. The hand pumps were
found to be unsatisfactory and as a consequence thereof
a large number of inmates suffered from gastroenteritis.
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 901
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
The report found the presence of E. coli which indicated
faecal contamination in water and the probable cause
of death is stated to be the passage of human excreta
into the drinking water and subsequent passage of vibrio
cholera bacteria from one inmate to another by way of
simple transmission by contact through the water. It was
found that the shallow ground water table as well as soil
near the sources of water has been contaminated. Various
suggestions were made to improve the conditions.
A detailed investigation pursuant to the report of SDM,
Narela, was carried out by Shri. Manpreet Singh, Inquiry
Officer, who submitted a report dated 1st June, 2000.
The report noted that there was cholera out break in
the beggars home and since contamination of water is
reason for the same, there could be not doubt about the
cause of deaths. It is further stated that since no post
mortem had been carried out in all the six cases, the fact
that the patients died of cholera cannot be established,
notwithstanding the report of the part time doctor, sh.
Sukhija declaring the deaths to be natural. The report
found that the superintendents of in-charge of the Home
had failed to take certain precautions and if they had
been vigilant enough, immediate medical attention could
have been provided to the inmates. The PWD was held
responsible for the lapse insofar as the leakage of the
water from the rear wall of the bathroom was concerned
which contaminated the water and the PWD, Electrical,
was mainly held responsible for the generators not being
functioning for operation of the tube wells.
Insofar as the improvement of the conditions of the homes
are concerned, the reports have been filed from time to
time to slow the progress of the work.
It has been stated before us on 3rd October, 2001 by the
learned counsel for the respondents that in pursuance to
the report of the SDM, Narela and the subsequent report,
Shri B.S Tolia and Shri M.S Meena have been placed under
suspension and are facing departmental proceedings. It is
stated that proceedings for major penalties are in progress
902 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
against these officers for the negligence in handling of the
homes resulting in death of the inmates.
In view of the action which has already been initiated
the only direction necessary is that the respondents will
proceed expeditiously with the departmental proceedings
and conclude the same within a period of six months from
today. Order accordingly. Thus the first and third prayer
in the petition stand satisfied in view of an enquiry having
been held into the incident and the responsibility having
been fixed. The respondent will take all further necessary
action against the persons responsible for the tragedy.
Insofar as relief No. 2 is concerned, no relation has so
far come forth in respect of the death of these beggars.
If such a claim is received by the Department, it shall
be duly examined and appropriate compensation will be
assessed and disbursed to them.
We have already indicated that the present writ petition is
being confined to the reliefs claimed for. We, however, note
that in pursuance to the report of the special committee
and the departmental action to remedy the situation in the
beggars home, steps have been taken from time to time
and reports have been filed. In view of this, we are inclined
to issue a further direction to the respondents to complete
the action in terms of making the homes more habitable in
consonance with the reports of the fact finding committee
within a maximum period of six months from today.”
11. Thereafter, the appellant filed C.M. No. 11595 of 2002 seeking
implementation of the order dated 15.10.2001. The said application
was disposed of by the High Court, merely granting liberty to the
appellant to approach the appropriate forum if still dissatisfied. Hence,
the appellant has approached this Court by way of the present appeal.
12. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court,
on 28.11.2000, had appointed a committee comprising Court Officers
(Deputy Registrar and Legal Assistant of the High Court) and three
advocates – Mr. R.K. Saini, Ms. Rekha Agarwal, and Ms. Sushmita
Lal – to investigate the episode of eight unnatural deaths and the
outbreak of a cholera epidemic in the Beggars’ Home, Lampur, Narela,
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 903
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
New Delhi, in May 2000. This committee was directed to submit a
fact-finding report at the earliest, and on 09.1.2001, submitted only an
interim report, seeking more time for a final report due to the gravity
of the matter involving large-scale deaths, a serious epidemic, criminal
negligence, misfeasance, and atrocities on inmates. Thereafter, no
extension was granted, and the High Court, on 08.07.2003, passed
the final order without ascertaining compliance with its earlier order
dated 15.10.2001 and without obtaining the committee’s final report.
12.1. It was further submitted that the interim findings revealed
shocking lapses, including human excreta mixing with drinking
and cooking water, food unfit for human consumption, physical
assaults on inmates and the use of ferocious dogs to terrorize
inmates and force them to work in nearby private agricultural
fields for the vested interests of caretakers and managing
officers. The committee also found officers absent or intoxicated
during inspections and had sought more time for a thorough
inquiry to fix responsibility and recommend remedies, which
request was ignored by the High Court.
12.2. Learned counsel further alleged that the respondents filed
false and misleading reports before the National Human
Rights Commission and the High Court, concealing facts from
multiple authorities including the Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Narela, ADM North-west Delhi, Municipal Commissioner,
relevant medical and ministerial authorities, the Chief Minister,
and the Lt. Governor of Delhi. It was also submitted that the
respondents misled the court in WP (C) No. 3118/2000, as
noted by the Director of Vigilance, Government of NCT of
Delhi. The High Court wrongly relied solely on the respondents’
counter affidavit and the interim committee report, ignoring the
appellant’s rejoinder, the need for final verification of claimed
improvements, and the responsibility for criminal negligence
and atrocities. The order dated 15.10.2001 had directed
completion of remedial actions within six months, yet no final
report was filed after that period, and the affidavit along with
the Vigilance Director’s letter dated 20.05.2002 indicating false
averments, was disregard by the High Court in the impugned
order. It was also submitted that no officer has been held
accountable, and Beggars’ Homes continue to suffer from
serious shortcomings, bottlenecks, and problems.
904 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
12.3. With these submissions, the learned counsel prayed for
appropriate directions to ensure accountability, proper
inspection, and genuine improvement in the conditions of
certified institutions under the Government of NCT of Delhi.
13. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted
that the High Court carefully considered the report of the fact-finding
committee and the affidavit filed by the respondents regarding the
improvements and actions taken by the second respondent based
on the reports submitted by SDM and ADM. Being satisfied with the
status report submitted by the respondents, the High Court passed
a justifiable order in the writ petition, with respect to the reliefs
claimed by the appellant, which had been duly complied with by
the respondents.
13.1. According to the learned counsel, based on the special
committee’s report relating to remedial measures in Beggars’
Homes, steps were taken from time to time and reports were
filed by the respondents. The respondents are strictly following
the provisions of the Begging Act and Rules. However, the
appellant raked up fresh developments by filing the present
application, which is not only a gross abuse of process of
law but also not maintainable. In this regard, reference was
made to the decision of this court in State of Uttar Pradesh v.
Brahm Datt Sharma and another2, wherein it was held that
‘when proceedings stand terminated by final disposal of a writ
petition, it is not open to the Court to reopen the proceedings
by means of a miscellaneous application in respect of a matter
which provides a fresh cause of action’.
13.2. Continuing further, the learned counsel submitted that after
passing of the order dated 15.10.2001 by the High Court, all
efforts were taken to complete the disciplinary proceedings
initiated against the delinquent officials. Accordingly, inquiry
was completed and the competent authority imposed the
punishment of penalty on them. The delay in completion of
inquiry was occasioned on account of the requirement of
obtaining concurrence from the Department of Vigilance,
Government of NCT of Delhi, and the Central Vigilance
Commission, as per the procedure laid down.
2 (1987) 2 SCC 179
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 905
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
13.3. It was further submitted that the second respondent, namely,
the Department of Social Welfare, Government of NCT of
Delhi, administers various statutory and non-statutory social
welfare programmes for the weaker sections of society and is
entrusted with the implementation of social legislations such as
the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, and the Bombay Prevention
of Begging Act, 1959 (BPBA). The Department of Social
Welfare functions as the nodal agency for the implementation
of the BPBA, which was extended to the NCT of Delhi in the
year, 1960. For the purpose of operationalising the Act, the
Government notified the Delhi Prevention of Begging Rules,
1960.
13.4. It was further pointed out that there are eleven statutory
institutions established for accommodating beggars during
their trial and sentence periods, as determined by the Beggars’
Court. In addition to the regular Beggar’s Court, two Mobile
Beggars’ Courts were also set up in 2009. The duration of
detention in these institutions varies according to the merits
of each case. The daily life of the inmates is regulated in
accordance with the Department’s Manual, which provides for
free food, lodging, boarding, clothing, bedding, medical care,
recreation, and rehabilitation facilities.
13.5. With respect to improvements of living conditions and hygiene
in the Beggars’ Home in dispute, affidavits had been filed earlier
and accepted by the High Court. Additional measures included
regular inspection of food by Welfare officers, provision of
clothing and bedding, supply of safe drinking water from Delhi
Jal Board, a functional ambulance for emergencies, vocational
training in trades like weaving, tailoring, and cycle repair,
PWD maintenance and repairs, installation of false ceilings in
dormitories, and engagement of the NGO Caring Foundation
for counselling, rehabilitation, detoxification, acupuncture
therapy, and recreational programmes. A new sewerage tank
was operational, and anti-begging squads were given arrest
guidelines. Volunteers from NGOs and Delhi University’s
Faculty of Law visited the Reception-cum-Classification Centre
for counselling and legal aid. Family members of detainees
were informed by post or phone, workshops were held for
906 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
caretakers, procurement guidelines were streamlined, and food,
water supply, and health services were monitored regularly. In
view of these measures, the learned counsel submitted that
nothing survives in this appeal and it deserves to be dismissed.
14. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel, appointed as amicus curiae,
submitted that a detailed synopsis of the functioning of Beggars’
Homes, along with suggestions and proposed directions to the
respondents, had already been placed before this Court. Pursuant
thereto, this Court issued various directions to the respondents, which
have also been complied with to the considerable extent. He further
submitted that such remedial measures ought to be extended to all
Beggars’ Homes across the country, so as to prevent recurrence of
lapses in hygiene, health care, and living conditions, and to secure
the dignity and fundamental rights of the inmates.
15. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the
learned counsel appearing for all the parties, including Mr. Ranjit
Kumar, learned senior counsel, who has ably assisted the Court as
Amicus Curiae. We have also perused the entire materials available
on record.
16. Historically, the treatment of the indigent persons has oscillated
between two diametrically opposed paradigms – criminalisation
on the one hand and compassion on the other. In early modern
England, the Elizabethan Poor Laws of 1601 institutionalised a moral
distinction between the “deserving poor” – those unable to work due
to age, disability, or illness – and the “undeserving poor”, typically
the able-bodied unemployed, vagrants, or itinerants. While the
former could receive parish relief, the latter were subjected to harsh
punitive measures, including confinement in workhouses, corporal
punishment, or forced labour. These measures were grounded not
in a rehabilitative ethic but in a disciplinary and deterrent framework
aimed at social control.
16.1. This colonial attitude travelled to India under British rule.
Vagrancy laws – including the Bombay Prevention of Begging
Act, 1959 (and its variants in other states) – were introduced
not as instruments of social welfare, but as tools of public
order and colonial governance. Their design mirrored the
Victorian and Edwardian suspicion of poverty as a moral
failing rather than a socio-economic condition. Even in the
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 907
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
post-independence period, this punitive legacy has endured
in the anti-begging statutes of several Indian States, which
often permit the arrest, detention, and forced confinement of
persons merely on the basis of appearance or circumstance,
without commission of any substantive offence.
16.2. In contrast, the Indian Constitutional framework post – 1950
marks a decisive normative shift. The founding vision is
explicitly welfare- centric, committed to dismantling structural
inequalities and ensuring the dignity of every individual. This
ethos is embodied in the Directive Principles of State Policy –
particularly Article 38 (promoting welfare of the people), Article
39(e) (protecting workers’ health and strength), Article 41
(right to work, education, and public assistance), and Article
47 (raising the level of nutrition and public health). Together,
these provisions articulate the constitutional expectation of a
compassionate State, one that acts as a trustee of the well-
being of the poor, the sick, and the destitute.
16.3. In this constitutional context, beggars’ homes cannot be
conceived as quasi-penal facilities. Their role must be
restorative, not retributive – places of recovery, skill-building,
and reintegration into society. The term “home” itself carries
semantic and normative weight: it denotes safety, dignity,
belonging, and care. Any arrangement that degenerates into
a prison-like environment – characterised by overcrowding,
unhygienic conditions, arbitrary or involuntary confinement,
denial of medical treatment, neglect of mental health needs,
or restrictions on personal liberty – is not merely a policy
failure, but a constitutional infraction striking at the very heart
of Article 21.
16.4. Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the
right to life and personal liberty, has been interpreted by this
Court in an expansive and purposive manner. It is no longer
confined to mere animal existence; it embraces within its
fold the rights to dignity, health, shelter, privacy, and humane
treatment, with heightened protection for the most vulnerable
groups. In Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union
Territory of Delhi3, the Court held:
3 (1981) 1 SCC 608
908 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
“The right to life includes the right to live with human
dignity and all that goes along with it, namely, the
bare necessaries of life such as adequate nutrition,
clothing and shelter…”
This judicial articulation leaves no doubt that the State’s
responsibility towards indigent persons is affirmative and non-
derogable. A beggars’ home, maintained by the State, is thus a
constitutional trust, not a discretionary charity. Its administration
must reflect the values of constitutional morality – ensuring
liberty, privacy, bodily autonomy, and dignified living conditions.
16.5. This Court’s decision in Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons,
In Re4 provides further normative guidance. Speaking in the
context of prisons, the Court observed that prisoners too are
entitled to basic human rights, including the right to live with
dignity. The State has a duty to ensure that its institutions do
not function in a manner repugnant to constitutional morality.
16.6. If such protections are owed to convicts and undertrials –
individuals lawfully deprived of liberty pursuant to criminal
conviction or prosecution – a fortiori, they must apply to
residents of beggars’ homes, who are not offenders at all. Many
are victims of structural poverty, mental illness, abandonment,
domestic violence, caste discrimination, or social exclusion.
Their confinement, if necessary, at all, must be in the nature
of protective custody accompanied by comprehensive
rehabilitation services, rather than coercive detention.
16.7. In sum, the constitutional evaluation of beggars’ homes requires
a paradigm shift – from viewing them as instruments of social
control to recognising them as spaces of social justice. The
failure to ensure humane conditions in such homes does
not merely amount to maladministration; it represents a
constitutional breach of the fundamental right to life with dignity,
thereby inviting judicial intervention. With the above principles
in mind, we shall now delve into the facts of the present case.
17. At the outset, it is necessary to understand the scope, ambit, and
purpose of the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 (in short,
4 (2016) 3 SCC 700
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 909
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
“BPBA”), as extended to the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Originally, enacted in Maharashtra, the BPBA has been adopted
or adapted by several States and Union Territories to regulate and
control begging. Its enforcement, however, varies significantly,
across jurisdictions, and its constitutional validity has been tested
on multiple occasions.
17.1. Notably, in Harsh Mander v. Union of India 5, the Delhi
High Court struck down certain provisions of the BPBA
which criminalized begging, holding them to be violative of
the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
Importantly, there is no central law uniformly governing begging
in India. The subject falls within the competence of both Union
and State legislatures, and is predominantly regulated through
State or UT legislation.
17.2. Several States and Union Territories have enacted their own
laws modelled substantially on the BPBA. These include:
• The Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Begging Act, 1977
• Assam Prevention of Begging Act, 1964
• The Bihar Prevention of Beggary Act, 1951
• The Goa, Daman and Diu Prevention of Begging Act,
1972
• The Madhya Pradesh Biksha Vritti Nivaran Adhiniyam,
1973
• The Gujarat Prevention of Begging Act, 1959
• The Haryana Prevention of Beggary Act, 1971
• The Himachal Pradesh Prevention of Beggary Act, 1979
• The Punjab Prevention of Beggary Act, 1971
• The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975
(adopted by Uttarakhand)
• The Karnataka Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975
• The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Begging Act, 1945 (earlier
known as The Madras Prevention of Begging Act, 1945)
5 AIR 2018 Del 188
910 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
• The Sikkim Prohibition of Beggary Act, 2004
• The Bengal Vagrancy Act, 1943
• The Jammu & Kashmir Prevention of Beggary Act, 1960.
17.3. The State undeniably has a legitimate interest in maintaining
public order, safety, and cleanliness. Begging in public
spaces may cause obstructions, harassment, and unsanitary
conditions, thereby impacting citizens’ rights to move freely
and enjoy public areas. The BPBA provides a legal framework
to identify, care for, and rehabilitate persons who beg – many
of whom are vulnerable due to poverty, disability, or social
exclusion. The Act envisages their placement in certified
institutions, where they may receive shelter, food, medical
treatment, and vocational training. In certain instances, begging
also serves as a front for human trafficking, child labour, or
organized exploitation, warranting State intervention for the
victims’ protection.
17.4. Section 4 of the BPBA empowers any police officer or authorized
person to arrest, without warrant, anyone found begging, and
to produce them before the Court. Under Section 5, a summary
inquiry is conducted by a Metropolitan Magistrate, and if the
Court is not satisfied that the person was found begging, they
must be released forthwith. However, if found guilty, the Court
shall order detention in a certified institution for not less than
one year and not more than three years. For repeat offenders,
Section 6 provides for enhanced detention of up to 10 years,
with a discretion to convert a portion of such detention, not
exceeding two years, into a term of imprisonment.
17.5. Pending inquiry or trial, detainees are housed at Reception-
cum-Classification Centres (RCCs). In Delhi, the Department
of Social Welfare / Rehabilitation Services operates 11
certified custodial / residential institutions for beggars, with
a total capacity of 2,180 inmates. These institutions provide
food, lodging, medical care, recreation, counselling, and skill
development aimed at rehabilitating inmates and enabling them
to give up begging. Presently, three Courts are notified under
the BPBA in Delhi – one at Sewa Kutir, Kingsway Camp, and
two Mobile Courts – assisted by three anti-begging squads
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 911
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
that conduct regular raids across the city. While such laws are
necessary for States to address begging as a social concern,
maintain public order, and facilitate rehabilitation of vulnerable
persons, their design and implementation must conform
to constitutional guarantees, uphold individual dignity, and
reflect constitutional morality, ensuring that regulation does
not degenerate into the criminalisation of poverty.
18. The present case arises out of a grave and unfortunate incident at
the Beggars’ Home, Lampur (Narela), where contamination of the
drinking and cooking water with coliform bacteria resulted in an
outbreak of cholera and gastroenteritis among the inmates. This
outbreak led to multiple deaths and widespread illness, exposing
serious lapses in sanitation, hygiene, and healthcare facilities within
the institution. The incident has given rise to the present public
interest litigation, instituted at the behest of the appellant, seeking
accountability, systemic reforms, and effective safeguarding of the
constitutional rights of these highly vulnerable individuals.
19. By order dated 15.10.2001, the High Court considered the reliefs
sought by the appellant and disposed of the writ petition in the
following terms:
• Reports filed from time to time indicated progress in improving
the conditions of the Home.
• The respondents were directed to complete the departmental
proceedings initiated against the erring officials within a period
of six months and to take all necessary action against those
responsible for the tragedy.
• Further, the respondents were directed to complete the
measures for making the Homes more habitable, in line with
the recommendations of the fact-finding committee, within a
maximum period of six months.
20. The appellant thereafter, filed an application before the High Court,
complaining of non-compliance with the aforesaid order dated
15.10.2001. However, the High court, without going into the merits
or passing a reasoned order, merely disposed of the application,
granting liberty to the appellant to approach the appropriate forum
if still aggrieved. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant has come forward
with the present appeal.
912 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
21. According to the respondents, the officers responsible for the
incident that occurred in May, 2000, were subjected to departmental
proceedings, and upon completion of the inquiry, penalty was imposed
on them, as punishment. There is no serious dispute on this aspect.
Accordingly, the direction of the High Court in this regard stands
complied with by the respondents.
22. With respect to the other directions issued by the High Court, it is
pertinent to note that since the inception of the present proceedings,
this Court has been issuing various directions to the concerned
authorities and continuously monitoring compliance. For the sake
of clarity, certain significant orders and developments are set out
hereinbelow:
22.1. On 13.04.2004, after hearing learned counsel for the parties,
this Court considered it just and appropriate to direct the same
Committee, which had earlier submitted an interim report dated
09.01.2001 to the High Court, to undertake a site visit and
submit a report on the existing conditions within eight weeks.
22.2. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the committee conducted
inspection of Tahirpur Home for Leaper Beggars (HTLB)
and Lampur Border Beggars’ Home, and submitted its report
detailing the pathetic conditions of the Homes along with its
recommendation, on 04.07.2005.
22.3. On 24.04.2006, when the matter was taken up, this Court
appointed Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Senior Advocate and Mr. Sanjay
Kapur, Advocate -on- Record, as Amicus Curiae to assist the
court and requested them to suggest guidelines to be laid
down for the future.
22.4. As directed by this Court, the Amicus Curiae analysed the
earlier reports filed by the SDM, ADM, and special committee,
the responses filed by the respondents, as well as the legal
framework, and submitted a synopsis of the case along with
suggestions and proposed directions to be issued to the
Government of NCT of Delhi for the maintenance and upkeep
of Beggars’ Homes.
22.5. By order dated 24.03.2017, this Court appointed the Secretary,
Delhi Legal Services Authority, as the third member of the
already constituted committee in place of Shri D.K. Batra. The
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 913
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
Committee was directed to conduct a fresh inspection within
three months to ascertain, in comparison to the previous report,
the present position and whether there had been improvement
or deterioration. The Secretary, Department of Social Welfare,
NCT of Delhi, was also directed to file an affidavit regarding
the current status of the Beggars’ Homes, and the proposals
for improvement.
22.6. On 06.09.2018, when the matter was taken up, the respondents
submitted that coordination with other departments was
required to implement this Court’s orders and sought time to
submit a concrete proposal and secure financial sanction for
improving the Beggars’ Homes. While acceding to the said
request, this Court directed that the quality of breakfast and
meals be improved within three days, and that at least one fruit
be served daily to each inmate, with a compliance affidavit to be
filed within seven days. A concrete proposal addressing other
deficiencies noted in the report was directed to be submitted
within six weeks. All concerned departments – namely, the
Public Works Department, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
and the Delhi Development Authority – were directed to act
in tandem without delay, and any laxity in this regard was
expressly deprecated.
22.7. On 31.10.2018, after considering the affidavit of the Deputy
Director (Social Defence), Department of Social Welfare,
Government of NCT of Delhi, this Court passed the following
order:
“….
Affidavit has been filed that is not only wholly
unsatisfactory but it shows the apathetic attitude of
the department towards need and the requirement.
Considering the various averments made in the
affidavit, we issue the following directions:
1) Let the two part-time dressers, three nursing
orderlies and one staff nurse, part-time and full-time
doctors and medical officer who has been appointed
and has not joined be appointed within a period of
one month from today.
914 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
2) Remaining sanctioned staff be appointed as
mentioned at para 6 and 7 within a period of one
month from today.
3) Food Chart which is served twice shown in
Annexures 1 and 2, the same needs to be verified
along with its quality by dietitian.
4) Let fresh drink be served on every day not only in
summers but the requisite suitable drink in winters
also as may be advised by dietician.
5) With respect to the renovation of building, the
boundary wall, floors, roof, walls be renovated.
Suitable tile work be also done.
6) There shall be proper drainage facilities as well as
proper ventilation provided in each and every room
within a month. Respondent to ensure that there is
no mosquito breeding and water logging or foul smell.
7) Let the renovation work be completed by the end
of December, 2018. It will be personal responsibility
of the Engineers to supervise and get the work done
of very good quality. If there is any remiss found in
the same, he will be hauled not only for disobedience
but for otherwise for doing the job properly and
appropriate action shall be recommended against
him by this Court in case any remiss is found.
8) Let the proper laundry facility be made available
within fifteen days from today. Mr. H.P.Sharma,
Electrical Engineer of CPWD would be responsible
for providing this facility and any remiss on his part
shall be treated seriously and appropriate action
shall be taken against him.
9) Renovation of bathroom and toilets has to be done
on war basis. Let the renovation of bathroom and
toilets be completed within a period of three weeks
from today and report be filed in this Court. Let the
tiles and modern flush system be also provided in
the toilets and bathroom should also be adequately
equipped with hot water facility as well as showers
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 915
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
etc. During renovation etc. there shall not be any
impediment created by anybody or any order of
stoppage of work and this has to be done on top
priority and no ban created by any authority shall
come in the way of the renovation.
10) With respect to the restoration of Leprosy Board,
let the proposal be submitted on the next date of
hearing.
11) Let Training-cum-Production Centre (TCPC) be
also functionalised within one month from today.
12) The counselling work be done on regular basis
and report be filed in this Court as to who is doing
the counselling and on which dates.
13) We direct the Senior most/Chief dietician of Guru
Teg Bahadur Hospital to make a surprise visit to
the leprosy home and submit a report in this Court.
Dietician is also requested to collect food chart that
is being served and give advice for better food and
what diet should be added for proper nourishment.
Let the chart be revised by the dietician considering
the health requirement for such persons and for
providing the proper and adequate good diet and
be submitted in this Court on the next date.
14) Let the Secretary of Delhi Legal Services
Authority and the counsel for the petitioner jointly
visit the leprosy home. We request the secretary of
Delhi Legal Services Authority to get videography
done of the entire premises including bathroom,
kitchen etc. also and to submit a report in this court,
on the next date of hearing.
15) We appreciate the gesture of the learned senior
counsel appearing on behalf of the State of NCT of
Delhi. It has been offered that in case any immediate
improvement is required, learned counsel for the
petitioner is free to approach the learned senior
counsel appearing on behalf of the State for doing
the needful.
List on 27.11.2018.”
916 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
22.8. Pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 31.10.2018, the Delhi
State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) filed its report
dated 22.11.2018, inter alia stating that the infrastructural
facilities – such as wards, kitchen, drinking water, laundry,
bathrooms, toilets, sewage system, and medical/dispensary
rooms – as well as the living conditions of inmates including
cleanliness and hygiene, were in a miserable state. The report
emphasised that substantial initiatives were required and that
the number of staff working in the Home also needed to be
increased considerably in order to execute welfare measures
for the benefit of inmates.
22.9. On 05.12.2018, when the matter was taken up, the Principal
Secretary, Social Welfare, assured that diet improvements
suggested for the winter would be implemented within three
days, and this Court directed accordingly.
22.10. On 13.12.2018, this Court observed that the condition of the
Lepers’ Home was ‘pathetic’. The Principal Chief Engineer,
PWD, East (M), submitted a comprehensive plan along with an
affidavit. The Court directed that the work be carried out in terms
of the plan, with plastering and other necessary improvements
included. Estimates for additional work were to be submitted
within one week to the Social Welfare Department, which was
directed to sanction the amount within three days of submission.
The comprehensive plan was to be implemented by the end
of December 2018, and the additional work completed by 10th
January 2019. The Dietician’s report was accepted in toto and
ordered to be implemented forthwith. The Superintendent of
the Lepers’ Home was directed to file a compliance report.
Improvements suggested in the kitchen, including water
supply and other facilities, were to be attended to by the Chief
Engineer, along with steps suggested by DSLSA. The court
mandated that food of proper quality and adequate quantity
be supplied to all inmates.
22.11. On 19.02.2019, when the matter was taken up, upon perusal
of the DSLSA report, this Court passed the following order:
“…
Certain deficiencies have been found at the Home
for Leprosy and T.B. Affected Beggars (HLTB)
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 917
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
and Home for Leprosy Affected Beggars, Tahirpur
Complex, Delhi-95. The following deficiencies have
been found:
1. The electric switch board and toilets in the
Medical Care Unit need repair and the table lying
in the Medical Care Unit is to be replaced.
2. The bathroom and toilet behind medical room
were not repaired and the backdoor entrance of
the medical room was also not in good condition.
One cooler was still lying in dirty condition and
the windows and grills of the medical room were
also not painted.
3. Drainage system was found blocked at the
bathing area. The clamps on the water pipes was
not fitted properly. Slopping on the floor was not
proper and the water cooler needed to be replaced/
painted. PWD had been requested to provide
stainless steel unbreakable sanitary fittings which
had low maintenance and there was no unusual
risk of damage and theft to the same.
4. Geysers for hot water supply were yet to be
provided. Old water pump house was yet to be
repaired. Grill in the area surrounding the pump
was yet to be painted. Grills over the drains were
yet to be provided.
5. No exhaust fan had been provided in the urinal
block. At least two fans should be provided so that
the block does not stink.
6. Additional trained staff is required for the laundry
to operate the machines but the requisition had
not been sent to the concerned authority.
7. The collapsible iron gate which appeared to be
of no use, is to be removed. Door frame had to be
painted. Lot of water logging was found inside the
laundry area because of insufficient slope of the
floor. The backside area around the ground water
pump was required to be repaired.
918 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
8. Outside laundry area, the electrical poles are
yet to be painted and street lights are yet to be
provided.
9. Though broken cots had been repaired, yet
the height of cots was found inappropriate as per
the requirements of inmates and the cots were
still found to be supported on bricks to raise their
height. The work providing and fitting of window
panes was yet to be completed.
10. Exhaust fans at most of the places were yet to
be provided and fitted. The drainage pipe of rain
water fitted on the wall of wards was not properly
connected. It has to be connected with proper
clamping. The approach road to the wards were
required to be properly repaired.
11. One of the rooms kept for entertainment in the
wards with the facility of LED TV requires proper
sitting arrangements by providing mats, chairs etc.
12. The dark spot areas in the home should
be appropriately fenced and lighted to check
unauthorized entry and commission of thefts etc.
13. No substantial work had been done in the
kitchen for renovation except repairing of some
tiles.
14. There was no supervisory staff to check the
preparation of food items. Superintendent informed
that he would seek advice from Dietician for posting
of supervisory staff to check preparation of various
food items, their quantity and quality etc.
15. Repairing work in open space between kitchen
and dormitory is yet to be completed.
16. In the dining room, painting of roof, window,
grills, frames and shutters were required to be
done. Exhaust fan was also required to be installed.
There was sitting capacity of around 80 inmates
at one time. The repair work of roof of the corridor
was required to be done in two dining rooms. It was
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 919
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
noticed that one of these rooms was situated much
away from kitchen area which is not advisable.
17. Four food distribution trolleys had been hired
for one month for a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month
and the trolleys were yet to be purchased.
18. Painting of exhaust fans, window frames,
shutters and stools were yet to be done.
19. Grills and dwarf walls around the temple/
worship place were yet to be painted.
20. Some toilets in the sick ward still require repair
work.
21. Inmates of sick ward stated that the trees at
the complex of sick ward needs to be pruned from
time to time for proper sun light.
22. Welfare Officers who were doing counselling of
inmates were stated to be possessing the Master
degree in social welfare. Thus it was stated that
meanwhile they were providing counselling to the
inmates, the professional counsellors were yet to
be appointed.
23. Upon interaction with inmates, it was enquired
as to whether the diet chart provided by the
dietician was followed or not. Around 20-25 inmates
confirmed that the diet had been provided as
per the chart but they were not satisfied with the
quantity.
24. The Inspection Team is of the opinion that
painting of windows, grills, frames and shutters
are required to be done in all the dormitories and
dining room. The surface which is being painted
has not been properly cleaned and shall be peeled
off to increase durability of paint/white wash.
25. The team also visited the temple adjacent to
the Laundry room and found that it was required
to be properly painted and some plantation should
be done for its beautification.
920 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
26. It is reported that there are only seven Safai
Karamcharis for cleaning the entire premise and
keeping in view of the huge area around 20 Safai
Saramcharis are required to be deputed/appointed.
It has been further reported that the demand in this
regard has already been sent to the Department
of social Welfare but there is no progress so far.
27. The team also observed that for the security
purpose, there was no security guard in the entire
premises and no CCTV camera was installed at
any place of the entire premises of HLTB or TCPC,
which are considered very necessary to have a better
supervision over the security and activities going on.
28. No improvement was found at Training-cum-
Production Centre (TCPC) by the team. It was as
bad as it was noticed during visit on 12.12.2018.
Let all the aforesaid deficiencies be removed and
requisite improvements be made within four weeks
from today except as directed by us hereinafter
for kitchen and food quantity.
In case the deficiencies are not removed, the
concerned official shall be responsible for non-
compliance and violating the mandate of this Court
and will have to be present in the court on the next
date of hearing.
However, with respect to the quantity and quality
of the food, the same should be done within one
week after consulting a Dietician. The kitchen
be repaired within two months and compliance
affidavit be filed.
The compliance affidavits filed on behalf of the
respondent – Social Welfare Department is taken
on record.
List this matter on 27.3.2019.”
22.12. Notably, the deficiencies pointed out in the aforesaid order,
were rectified and a compliance report was filed by the learned
counsel for respondent(s) on 27.03.2019.
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 921
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
22.13. On 25.04.2019, this Court directed the respondents to furnish
a response regarding non-installation of CCTV cameras, and
further directed that security guards be posted within ten days.
22.14. On 09.05.2019, when the matter was taken up, the learned
Amicus Curiae, Mr. Ranjit Kumar, pointed out persistent
deficiencies in the compliance / status report filed by the
Social Welfare Department. The Court recorded these
deficiencies and proceeded with further monitoring. For better
understanding, the said order is reproduced below:
“…
Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel has
pointed out that in the compliance / status report
filed on behalf of the Social Welfare Department,
there are deficiencies which still exist. Following
deficiencies have been pointed out:
1) There is shortage of care taking staff. There are
only 5 care taking staff whereas the requirement
is that of 10 care taking staff.
Let the respondent(s) appoint 5 more care taking
staff within a period of six weeks from today.
2) It was also pointed that there is requirement
of 20 Safai Karamcharis. However, only 10 Safai
Karamcharis have been provided. Let 10 more
Safai Karamcharis be provided within six weeks.
(3) It was also pointed out that the bathroom fittings
are not up to the mark. Let this work be looked into.
(4) Out of 22 geysers, only 12 have been installed.
Let 10 geysers be installed which are lying in the
store within four weeks.
(5) There is requirement of additional staff for
laundry as pointed out in the report. Let additional
staff be provided within six weeks as pointed out
in the report.
(6) Let the care takers be trained within a period
of one month from today so that laundry machine
may be operated with their help.
922 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
(7) There are certain inappropriate cots whose
height was not sufficient. Let those cots be changed
within one month from today.
(8) There are certain holes due to removal of the
exhaust fans. Those holes have not been closed.
Let those holes be closed within a period of 3
weeks from today, especially in Ward Nos. 36 to 39.
(9) Repair/renovation of Kitchen be completed
within by 30th June, 2019.
(10) It was also pointed out that the quantity
and quality of food/diet provided to the inmates
required is to be increased/improved and there was
complaint of deficiencies of quality and quantity.
Let the quantity/quantity be increased/improved.
With respect to which we request the Dietician of
GTB Hospital to make surprise inspection every
month and submit periodical reports to this Court.
Let fresh inspection be done in 10 days and report
be submitted and concerned authorities be advised
for improving the quality and quantity which shall
be strictly followed forthwith without any further
order of this Court.
Let the advice so made by Dietician be placed
on record within a period of 6 weeks from today.
(11) Let the ROs which are not functioning be
replaced within 15 days as water is an absolute
necessity during the time of summers.
(12) Professional Psychiatric Counsellor be
provided within a period of six weeks from today.
Only one Psychiatry Social Worker has been
provided at HLTB that cannot be said to be
compliance of the order passed by this Court.
(13) With respect to Security Guards as well as
CCTV installation, it was pointed out by learned
Amicus as well as learned counsel on behalf of
the petitioner that some officers of Centre create
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 923
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
unrest in the inmates so that no security guard
and CCTV is installed to check their activities
and also the pilferage which is being made by the
officers. This aspect is required to be seriously
looked into. We request learned counsel on behalf
of the petitioner and State also to look into this
aspect and there should be no room for any such
complaint. Report be submitted by next date as to
what is the basis of the objection by the inmates/
officers for security guards and CCTV installation.
In case counsel for the petitioner wants to visit the
centre, let police protection be provided to him.
The Member Secretary of Delhi Legal Services
Authority is requested to look into and investigate
the matter at his own level and submit a report in
this Court as regards Security Guard and CCTV
installation.
List in the last week of July, 2019.”
22.15. The record of proceedings dated 09.11.2022 is also of
significance, wherein, this Court took note of remedial
measures adopted by the respondent authorities and directed
the Department to furnish details regarding the number of
residents undergoing training, the carrying capacity of the
training centres, and the feasibility of reopening the second
training centre at Lampur, Narela. The Court had further called
upon the Department to explore the possibility of introducing
additional trade activities to promote economic self-reliance
among the residents. For ease of reference, the said order
is extracted below:
“A further affidavit-in-reply on behalf of respondent
No.2 – Department of Social Welfare, Government
of NCT of Delhi, to the Status Report dated
10.12.2021 is filed which is dated 04.05.2022.
In the affidavit-in-reply, it is stated that the Training-
cum-Production Centres (TCPC) at the Home for
Leprosy & TB affected Beggars’ (HLTB), Tahirpur
Complex in North-East Delhi is functional. It is
stated that Leprosy Affected Persons (LAPs)
924 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
residing in this Complex are being provided
training in the trade of handloom weaving and for
this purpose, an Instructor had been engaged to
manage and oversee training of residents under
the supervision of the Superintendent, TCPC(L).
It appears that during the pandemic, the training
programme was temporarily suspended. However,
thereafter, training at TCPC(L) has been resumed.
It is reported that the Instructor has retired w.e.f.
28.02.2022.
Ms. Madhavi Divan, learned ASG, has stated at the
Bar, under the instruction, that the new Instructor
has taken over the charge.
In the affidavit-in-reply, it is further stated that there
is adequate quantity of raw materials available for
the training programme at the TCPC. Procurement
of additional quantities of raw material for future
needs is under process.
It is further stated in the reply that the Department
is presently identifying and exploring the possibility
of providing training in other trades, based on the
abilities of the residents at the Complex and also
the current market demand and the Department
is liaising with the NGOs for that purpose.
Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned Amicus Curiae, has
drawn our attention to paras 8, 11, 13 & 15 of
the further affidavit-in reply. Paras 8, 11, 13 & 15
reads as under:
“8. The answering Department is presently con-
sidering proposals for training collaborations with
non-government organizations. The collaborations
will facilitate engagement of trainer on salary basis,
internships for trainees who can assist during the
training programmes, provision for stipends to be
offered to trainees based on the sale of products
and creation of market linkages for sale of the
products etc. The answering Department is con-
sidering whether pilot Batch of 50 residents can
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 925
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
be created to test the feasibility of certain training
programmes over others. Further, the answering
Department will ensure space allocations and water
and electricity for the training programmes to be
conducted. Suitable personnel will be authorized to
take care of the stock of finished goods, and also
to assist the trainers and other staff to acclimatize
at the TCPC(L).
11. The answering Department has obtained status
reports from the respective PWD’s regarding
rectification of defects and work done at the HLTB
Complex. It is respectfully submitted that a lot of
progress has been made and most of the defects
have been rectified.
13. The Executive Engineer (Civil), KKD Court
Division, PWD has informed the answering
Department that the following defects have also
been rectified: repair of staircase of two storied
building; repair/replacement of doors, sanitary
and water supply fittings of toilets pursuant to
complaints from time to time; laying of a new sewer
line for the sick ward in front of the administration
office; replacement of damaged overhead tank of
5000 litre capacity near the two storied building;
and strengthening of pillars of the sick ward by
fixing wall tiles. Further, work to make the building
complex suitable for Persons with Disability will
also be taken up in conformity with accessibility
guidelines, and an estimate for the same has
already been submitted.
15. The Assistant Director (Horticulture), PWD has
also sought approvals for the horticultural work
required to be completed at the HLTB Complex.
Horticultural work at the Complex is also in
progress.
A copy of the letter dated 25.10.2019 as received
from the Assistant Director (Horticulture), PWD
is marked and annexed herein as Annexure R/5.
A sanction letter dated 21.03.22 amounting to
926 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Rs.5,28,700/- has been issued to Deputy Director
(Horticulture) for maintenance of Horticulture works
at HLTB Tahirpur.”
Let the Department file a fresh Status Report
on what further steps are taken to improve the
condition of the TCPC as well as the infrastructure
and other facilities and on what is stated in the
aforesaid paras.
From the report of surprise visit held on 23.02.2022
by Mrs. Kamlesh Sethi, Dietician, Guru Teg Bahadur
Hospital (GTBH), the following observations were
made:
“HLTB centre is well organized and net & clean.
1. Quality of food items:- There is no complaint
raised by the inmates regarding quality of food.
Food preparation was satisfactory.
2. Quantity of food items:- Few suggestions given
by inmates regarding quantity which are:-
A) Cereal intake i.e. Atta may be increased. We
have already suggested this point earlier in meeting
held at GTBH on 11/02/19 in the chamber of The
Medical Director, GTBH.
B) To increase palatability, salt may be increased
from 5 gm to 10 gm per inmate.
C) In winters milk intake may be increased instead
of curd.
D) As mentioned in food charts 2 portions of fruits
(1 banana + 1 citrus/seasonal fruit) to be instead
of one, two medium size fruits may be served.
E) In dal portion size, they may include besan/
kabuli chana/rajma/kala chana/soyabean as per
inmates choice.
F) Instead of boiled egg, may be replaced with egg
curry & egg bhurji/egg omelette as per inmates
request.”
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 927
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
Of course there are some further reports filed by
the Dietics Department of GTBH, the copies be
furnished to Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned Amicus
Curiae, as well as learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner as well as Ms. Madhavi
Divan, learned ASG.
A specific report/answer be filed on behalf of the
Department on the aforesaid aspects also.
In the further reply to be filed, the Department
to specifically state how many affected persons
are taking training/residing; what is the carrying
capacity of the Training Centres and whether the
second training Centre at Lampur, Narela can be
reopened or not.
Further affidavit-in-reply to be filed within a period
of four weeks pointing out the further steps taken
as on today.
In the further report, the Department may also
state whether any other trade activities other than
handloom activities is being carried out or not and/
or whether it can be carried out or not so that all
those affected persons do not become dependent
on others and they are economically sound.
To come up on 12.12.2022.”
22.16. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the Department filed its status
report dated 10.03.2023, setting out the actions undertaken
in compliance therewith. The relevant paragraphs of the
same read as under:
“5….
Report: Currently, the building complex is in good
condition and it does not require modification.
However, from time to time the need assessment is
done, if need arises sanction is given accordingly.
6…
928 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Report: Day to day maintenance of Horticulture
Work are already being done against sanction of
Rs 5,28,000/.
7. It is submitted that further report with regards
to the surprise visit held on 23.02.2022 by Mrs.
Kamlesh Sethi, Dietician, Guru Teg Bahadur
Hospital (GTBH) which was extracted in the order
dated 09.11.2022…
Action taken :- In accordance with the report the
following actions has been undertaken
2(B) to increasing the salt intake 5gm to 10gm,
the proposal is under consideration for approval
of the Department.
2(C) In winters milk intake has been increased
instead of Curd.
2(D) As mentioned in food charts 2 portions of fruits
(1 banana + 1 citrus/seasonal fruit) is being served.
2(E) As per inmates choice besan/kabulichana/
rajma/kala chana//soyabean has been included
instead of Dal portion.
2(F) As per inmate request egg curry & egg bhurji/
egg omelette has been replaced instead of boiled
egg.
8. It is submitted that a surprise visit was held on
21/11/22 by Mrs. Sushma Bara (Sr. Dietician) and
Mr. Anjali Sharma (Asstt. Dietician) of Dietetics
Department, GTB Hospital and few of the
observations from her report as under:
I) HLTB Centre is well organized, neat and clean.
II) There is no complaint raised by the inmates
regarding quality and
Ill) Quantity of food prepared and increased
quantity of cereals.
IV) Daily Menu is provided as per the choice of
inmates and meal
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 929
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
V) Checking register is also maintained by the
Welfare Officer on duty.
VI) In response to the earlier observation (letter No.
FNo.11 (40)/Kitchen/GTBH/344-46 date 18/10/22,
point no. (5) the Welfare Officer assured to make
the relevant/required changes on the existing
displayed board.
…
9. It is submitted that another surprise visit was
held on 10/01/23 by Mrs. Sushma Bara (Sr.
Dietician) and Mr. Anjali Sharma (Asstt. Dietician)
of Dietetics Department, GTB Hospital and few of
the observations from her report as under: I) HLTB
Centre is well organized, neat arid clean.
II) There is no complaint raised by the inmates
regarding quality and Quantity of food prepared
and increased quantity of cereals.
III) Daily Menu is provided as per the choice of
inmates and meal
IV) Lunch prepared was inspected by the above
officials and found satisfactory.
V) In response to the earlier observation, (letter no.
F.No.11(40) /Kitchen/GTBH/344-46 date 18/10/22,
point no. (05) the Welfare Officer assured has
made the relevant/required changes on the existing
displayed board.
…
10. It is submitted that currently, TCPC(L) has 10
persons who are engaged in Training. The carrying
capacity of TCPC(L) Tahirpur is 50 (fifty). The
Department is still in the process of identifying the
dedicated NGO/Agencies who will help to upscale
the existing activities and linked with market so
that a handsome source of income may be created
and sustainability of the trade be maintained. It is
further stated that as far as starting other activities
930 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
are concerned, it is submitted that there are very
limited possibilities because of the deformities are
such that they are restricted to do physical work.
11. It is further also submitted that the TCPC(L)
Tahirpur’s infrastructure is in good condition. The
Drinking water facilities and 24 x7 electricity is
available. A security guard is also available to
maintain security for the TCPC(L).
12. It is submitted that Smt. Siya Dulari, Craft
Instructor has been taken the charge on 16/08/22.
She is also in charge of Goods & Raw Material.
Further, ODO/HO has full power to purchase
material vide F.10(530)/A-I/DSW/Estt/13445-13544
dated 13/10/22. Two months stocks are available
for handloom.
…
13. It is submitted that TCPC does not exist at
Lampur and Narela. It is also stated that no Leprosy
Affected Person are staying at Lampur & Narela
homes or nearby places.
…”
22.17. The records further reveal that a surprise inspection was most
recently conducted on 29.03.2025 by Mrs. Vandana Arora,
Senior Dietician, Dietetics Department, GTB Hospital, at the
HLTB Centre, Tahirpur, Delhi, accompanied by the caretaker
officer on duty and other staff members. The inspection noted
that the Centre was well-organized, neat, and clean. The
inmates raised no complaints regarding either the quality or
the quantity of food served. The daily menu was found to
be in conformity with the prescribed dietary protocol, with
appropriate variations introduced to accommodate the food
preferences of the inmates. A meal-checking register was
being duly maintained by the Welfare Officer on duty. The
lunch preparation was also inspected and found satisfactory.
The report, however, recommended that a dedicated Dietician
be recruited or designated within the Department to ensure
regular verification of food quality and adherence to nutritional
standards.
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 931
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
22.18. From the foregoing, it is evident that this Court has from
time to time, issued a series of directions aimed at improving
the conditions prevailing in Beggars’ Homes, and that the
concerned authorities have, by and large, complied therewith.
The cumulative effect of these measures has been tangible
improvement in infrastructure, health facilities, diet, sanitation,
and the overall living conditions of the inmates. The most
recent reports also record nil complaints from the inmates,
with the sole recommendation being the appointment of a
permanent Dietician. Thus, it stands established that the
respondents have duly complied with the order of the High
Court dated 15.10.2001 in its entirety.
23. At the same time, we are of the considered view that the progress
achieved should not remain confined to the Homes that were subject
to scrutiny in the present case, but must extend to all Homes under
the Government of NCT of Delhi. Moreover, all States and Union
Territories are required to institutionalise similar reforms in Beggars’
Homes and analogous institutions under their control, so that the
constitutional guarantee of life with dignity is meaningfully secured
for this most vulnerable section of society. As already emphasised,
Beggars’ Homes require a paradigm shift – from being perceived as
instruments of social control to being recognised as spaces of social
justice. The failure to ensure humane conditions in such Homes does
not merely amount to maladministration; it constitutes a constitutional
breach of the fundamental right to life with dignity. Accordingly, we
deem it appropriate to issue the following directions, in respect of all
Beggars’ Homes across the country, including the subject institutions
to ensure that the improved conditions are continuously maintained.
I. Preventive Healthcare and Sanitation
(1) Every individual admitted to a Beggars’ Home shall
mandatorily undergo a medical screening by a qualified
medical officer within 24 hours of admission.
(2) Monthly health check-ups shall be conducted for all
inmates by a designated medical team.
(3) A disease surveillance and early warning system shall
be established in all Beggars’ Homes, with special
protocols for the prevention, detection, and containment
of communicable and waterborne diseases.
932 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
(4) All State Governments / UTs shall frame, notify, and strictly
enforce minimum hygiene and sanitation standards in
Beggars’ Homes, which shall mandatorily include:
(a) continuous access to potable drinking water
(b) functional toilets with proper drainage systems; and
(c) regular pest control and vector management
measures.
II. Infrastructure and capacity
(5) All State Governments / UTs shall conduct an independent
third-party infrastructure audit of every Beggars’ Home
within their jurisdiction at least once every two years.
(6) Occupancy in each Beggars’ Home shall not exceed its
sanctioned capacity, so as to prevent overcrowding and
the spread of communicable diseases.
(7) Adequate provision shall be made for safe housing,
ventilation, and access to open spaces, consistent with
human dignity.
III. Nutrition and Food Safety
(8) Every Beggars’ Home shall appoint, or designate from
an associated Government Hospital, a qualified Dietician
to regularly verify the quality and nutritional standards of
food served to inmates.
(9) Standardised dietary protocols shall be framed, ensuring
nutritional adequacy.
IV. Vocational Training and Rehabilitation
(10) All Beggars’ Homes shall establish or expand vocational
training facilities aimed at skill development and economic
self-reliance of inmates.
(11) The State Governments / UTs shall explore partnerships
with governmental agencies, NGOs, and private
institutions to introduce diverse trades and employment-
oriented training programmes.
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 933
M.S. Patter v. State of NCT of Delhi and Others
(12) Periodic assessments shall be conducted to monitor the
effectiveness of rehabilitation initiatives and to facilitate
the reintegration of released inmates into society.
V. Legal Aid and Awareness
(13) Inmates shall be informed in a language they understand,
of their legal rights, including the right to contest detention
orders.
(14) State Legal Services Authorities shall designate panel
lawyers to visit Beggars’ Homes at least once every three
months, to provide free legal assistance and facilitate
access to bail, release, or appeal remedies.
VI. Child and Gender Sensitivity
(15) Where women or children are housed in such Homes,
the States / UTs shall provide separate facilities ensuring
privacy, safety, and access to child care, education, and
counselling.
(16) Children found begging shall not be detained in Beggars’
Homes but referred to child welfare institutions under
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2015.
VII. Accountability and Oversight
(17) Every State / UT shall constitute a Monitoring Committee
for Beggars’ Homes, comprising officials from the Social
Welfare Department, Public Health authorities, and
independent civil society members, to:
(a) prepare and publish annual reports on the condition
of Beggars’ Homes; and
(b) maintain accurate records of illnesses, deaths, and
remedial actions taken.
(18) In every case where the death of an inmate is attributed
to negligence, lack of basic facilities, or failure to provide
timely medical care:
934 [2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
(a) the State / UT shall pay reasonable compensation
to the next of kin of the deceased; and
(b) initiate departmental and, where warranted, criminal
proceedings against the officials found responsible.
VIII. Implementation and Compliance
(19) State Governments / UTs shall maintain a centralised
digital database of all inmates, recording details of
admission, health, training, release, and follow-up.
(20) The above directions shall be implemented within six
months from the date of this judgment.
23.1. The Union of India, through the Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment, shall, within three months, frame and notify
model guidelines to facilitate uniform implementation of the
aforesaid directions across all States and Union Territories.
23.2. The Registrar (Judicial) shall circulate a copy of this judgment
to the Chief Secretaries of all States and Union Territories
as well as to the Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice and
Empowerment, Government of India, for strict compliance.
23.3. Liberty is reserved to the parties to seek further directions,
should any difficulty arise in the course of implementation.
24. This appeal stands disposed of, with the above observations and
directions. There is no order as to costs.
25. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
Result of the case: Directions issued.
†
Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Beggars’ Homes"Sign in to search