Meta India representatives appeared before India’s National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) after the child rights body summoned the company’s managing director and head over serious allegations involving Instagram advertisements.

The inquiry follows a BBC investigation that alleged paid Instagram advertisements were being used to promote child sexual exploitation and abuse material, with users reportedly directed to Telegram channels where such material was allegedly sold.

The NCPCR took suo motu cognizance of the report and later opened a formal inquiry after reviewing Meta’s response. Separately, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has directed Delhi Police to investigate the allegations and examine whether Meta and other concerned entities complied with mandatory reporting obligations under the POCSO Act.

Both proceedings are currently focused on establishing the facts and determining whether any legal or regulatory obligations were breached.

Meta India Faces Child Rights Probe Over Alleged Instagram Ads Linked To Child Abuse Material

Madrassas are "unsuitable" places for children to receive "proper education" and the education imparted there is "not comprehensive" and is against the provisions of the Right to Education Act, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has told the Supreme Court.

The child rights body told the top court that children, who are not in formal schooling system, are deprived of their fundamental right to elementary education, including entitlements such as midday meal, uniform etc.

The NCPCR said madrassas merely teaching from a few NCERT books in the curriculum is a "mere guise" in the name of imparting education and does not ensure that the children are receiving formal and quality education.

"A madrassa is not only a unsuitable/unfit place to receive 'proper' education but also in absence of entitlements as provided under Sections 19, 21,22, 23, 24, 25, and 29 of the RTE Act," it said.

"Further, madrassas do not only render an unsatisfactory and insufficient model for education but also have an arbitrary mode of working which is wholly in absence of a standardised curriculum and functioning," the NCPCR said in its written submissions filed before the top court.

The child rights body stated that due to the absence of provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, the madrassas are also deprived of entitlement as in Section 21 of the Act of 2009.

"A madrassa works in an arbitrary manner and runs in an overall violation of the Constitutional mandate, RTE Act and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. It cannot be overlooked that a child getting education in such an Institution will be devoid of basic knowledge of school curriculum which is provided in a school.

"A school is defined under Section 2(n) of the RTE Act, 2009, which means any recognised school imparting elementary education. A madrassa being out of this definition has no right to compel children or their families to receive madrassa education," the NCPCR said.

It said most of the madrassas fail to provide a holistic environment to students, including planning social events, or extracurricular activities for 'experiential learning.

In a breather to about 17 lakh madrassa students, the apex court on April 5 had stayed an order of the Allahabad High Court that scrapped the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 calling it "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism.

Observing that the issues raised in the petitions merit closer reflection, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud had issued notices to the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh Government and others on the pleas against the high court order.

The top court said had the high court "prima facie" misconstrued the provisions of the Act, which does not provide for any religious instruction.

The high court had on March 22 declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism, and asked the state government to accommodate students in the formal schooling system.

The high court had declared the law ultra vires on a writ petition filed by advocate Anshuman Singh Rathore. 
It had said the state has "no power to create a board for religious education or to establish a board for school education only for a particular religion and philosophy associated with it."

"We hold that the Madarsa Act, 2004, is violative of the principle of secularism, which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution," the high court had said.

The petitioner had challenged the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa Board as well as objected to the management of madrassas by the Minority Welfare Department instead of the education department.

Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION&nbsp;audience. 
&nbsp;

Madrassas are "unsuitable" places for children to receive "proper education" and the education imparted there is "not comprehensive" and is against the provisions of the Right to Education Act, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has told the Supreme Court.

Madrassas are "unsuitable" places for children to receive "proper education" and the education imparted there is "not comprehensive" and is against the provisions of the Right to Education Act, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has told the Supreme Court. The child rights body told the top court that children, who are not in formal schooling system, are deprived of their fundamental right to elementary education, including entitlements such as midday meal, uniform etc. The NCPCR said madrassas merely teaching from a few NCERT books in the curriculum is a "mere guise" in the name of imparting education and does not ensure that the children are receiving formal and quality education. "A madrassa is not only a unsuitable/unfit place to receive 'proper' education but also in absence of entitlements as provided under Sections 19, 21,22, 23, 24, 25, and 29 of the RTE Act," it said. "Further, madrassas do not only render an unsatisfactory and insufficient model for education but also have an arbitrary mode of working which is wholly in absence of a standardised curriculum and functioning," the NCPCR said in its written submissions filed before the top court. The child rights body stated that due to the absence of provisions of the RTE Act, 2009, the madrassas are also deprived of entitlement as in Section 21 of the Act of 2009. "A madrassa works in an arbitrary manner and runs in an overall violation of the Constitutional mandate, RTE Act and the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. It cannot be overlooked that a child getting education in such an Institution will be devoid of basic knowledge of school curriculum which is provided in a school. "A school is defined under Section 2(n) of the RTE Act, 2009, which means any recognised school imparting elementary education. A madrassa being out of this definition has no right to compel children or their families to receive madrassa education," the NCPCR said. It said most of the madrassas fail to provide a holistic environment to students, including planning social events, or extracurricular activities for 'experiential learning. In a breather to about 17 lakh madrassa students, the apex court on April 5 had stayed an order of the Allahabad High Court that scrapped the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004 calling it "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism. Observing that the issues raised in the petitions merit closer reflection, a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud had issued notices to the Centre, the Uttar Pradesh Government and others on the pleas against the high court order. The top court said had the high court "prima facie" misconstrued the provisions of the Act, which does not provide for any religious instruction. The high court had on March 22 declared the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa Education Act, 2004, "unconstitutional" and violative of the principle of secularism, and asked the state government to accommodate students in the formal schooling system. The high court had declared the law ultra vires on a writ petition filed by advocate Anshuman Singh Rathore. It had said the state has "no power to create a board for religious education or to establish a board for school education only for a particular religion and philosophy associated with it." "We hold that the Madarsa Act, 2004, is violative of the principle of secularism, which is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution," the high court had said. The petitioner had challenged the constitutionality of the UP Madarsa Board as well as objected to the management of madrassas by the Minority Welfare Department instead of the education department. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

Madrassas 'unsuitable' place for children to receive proper education: India's child protection agency to SC

India's apex child rights body the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has summoned BYJU's CEO Byju Raveendran over allegations of malpractice of "hard selling and mis-selling" its courses to students.

As per PTI, Raveendran has to appear in person before the commission on December 23. The summon is reportedly based on news reports of BYJU's sales team indulging in malpractices to lure parents to buy&nbsp;courses for their children.

Watch |&nbsp;Byju's under scanner for ill-treatment of staff, struggling to raise funds

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/byjus-under-scanner-for-ill-treatment-of-staff-struggling-to-raise-funds-531141/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In a statement, the NCPCR said that it has "come across a news article wherein it has been pointed out that the sales team of BYJU'S is indulging in malpractices to lure parents to buy their courses for their children. lt has also been mentioned in the news report that some customers have also claimed that they were exploited and deceived, and had put their savings and futures in jeopardy".

The report also alleged that the company has even been actively tricking its customers to enter loan-based agreements for non-refundable courses.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/india-byjus-ceo-says-it-is-not-layoff-but-time-off-after-firing-employees-530189">India: BYJU's CEO says it is not 'layoff' but 'time off' after firing employees</a>

Many parents have raised complaints against the practice however BYJU didn't take any action.

"The Commission is in observance that indulging into malpractices to lure the parents or children into entering loan-based agreements and then causing exploitation is against the welfare of children and in pursuance of the functions and powers under Section 13 and 14 of CPCR Act, 2005," said the commission as per ANI.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/after-prolonged-audit-delay-byjus-reports-575-mn-losses-in-2021-516588">After prolonged audit delay, Byju's reports $575 million losses in 2021</a>

BYJU's CEO has to appear before the apex body along with details of all the courses run by his company, their fee structure, the number of enrolled students and the refund policy of the company.

If Raveendran fails to comply with the order without a lawful excuse &nbsp;"will be subjected to the consequences of the non-attendance as provided in Rule 10 and Rule l2 of Order XVI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908".&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

India's apex child rights body the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has summoned BYJU's CEO Byju Raveendran over allegations of malpractice of "hard selling and mis-selling" its courses to students.

India's apex child rights body the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has summoned BYJU's CEO Byju Raveendran over allegations of malpractice of "hard selling and mis-selling" its courses to students. As per PTI, Raveendran has to appear in person before the commission on December 23. The summon is reportedly based on news reports of BYJU's sales team indulging in malpractices to lure parents to buy courses for their children. Watch | Byju's under scanner for ill-treatment of staff, struggling to raise funds In a statement, the NCPCR said that it has "come across a news article wherein it has been pointed out that the sales team of BYJU'S is indulging in malpractices to lure parents to buy their courses for their children. lt has also been mentioned in the news report that some customers have also claimed that they were exploited and deceived, and had put their savings and futures in jeopardy". The report also alleged that the company has even been actively tricking its customers to enter loan-based agreements for non-refundable courses. Also read | India: BYJU's CEO says it is not 'layoff' but 'time off' after firing employees Many parents have raised complaints against the practice however BYJU didn't take any action. "The Commission is in observance that indulging into malpractices to lure the parents or children into entering loan-based agreements and then causing exploitation is against the welfare of children and in pursuance of the functions and powers under Section 13 and 14 of CPCR Act, 2005," said the commission as per ANI. Also read | After prolonged audit delay, Byju's reports $575 million losses in 2021 BYJU's CEO has to appear before the apex body along with details of all the courses run by his company, their fee structure, the number of enrolled students and the refund policy of the company. If Raveendran fails to comply with the order without a lawful excuse "will be subjected to the consequences of the non-attendance as provided in Rule 10 and Rule l2 of Order XVI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908". (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Ed-tech startup Byju's CEO summoned by India's apex child rights body over allegations of malpractice

OTT giant Netflix has been asked to remove its new series 'Bombay Begums'from the platform over its inappropriate portrayal of children in the series.&nbsp; 
 
The apex child rights body National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) issued a notice to Netflix on Thursday asking it to furnish a detailed action report within 24 hours, failing which it said it will initiate appropriate legal action.&nbsp; 
 
Objecting to the alleged inappropriate portrayal of children in the series, the commission said this type of content will not only pollute the young minds but may also result in the abuse and exploitation of children. 
 
The commission took action based on a complaint that alleged that the series normalises minors indulging in casual sex and drug abuse. 
 
"Netflix should take extra precaution while streaming any content in respect of the children or for the children and shall also refrain themselves from getting into such things," the commission said in its notice.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bombay-begums-review-pooja-bhatt-shahana-goswami-alankrita-srivastava-powerful-performances-with-an-over-used-narration-368829">Also read:&nbsp;'Bombay Begums' review: Powerful performances with an over-used narration</a> 
 
"Therefore, you are directed to look into this matter and immediately stop streaming of this series and furnish a detailed action report within 24 hours, failing which the Commission will be constrained to initiate appropriate action pursuant to the provisions of Section 14 of the CPCR (Commission for Protection of Child Rights) Act, 2005," the commission said.

The notice comes weeks after the Indian government stated that it is in the process of framing a code to regulate OTT (over-the-top) platforms. The government is looking at monitoring content in order to remove anything that can be deemed as objectionable on the digital space.&nbsp; 
 
'Bombay Begums' delves into the lives of five women of varied age groups and from different sections of society who all want different things in life. A 13-year-old girl serves as a narrator to the story. The series has been directed by Alankrita Srivastava and stars Pooja Bhatt, Amruta Subhash, Shanana Goswami, Rahul Bose and others.&nbsp;

OTT giant Netflix has been asked to remove its new series 'Bombay Begums'from the platform over its inappropriate portrayal of children in the series. The apex child rights body National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) issued a notice to Netflix on Thursday asking it to furnish a detailed action report within 24 hours, failing which it said it will initiate appropriate legal action.

OTT giant Netflix has been asked to remove its new series 'Bombay Begums'from the platform over its inappropriate portrayal of children in the series. The apex child rights body National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) issued a notice to Netflix on Thursday asking it to furnish a detailed action report within 24 hours, failing which it said it will initiate appropriate legal action. Objecting to the alleged inappropriate portrayal of children in the series, the commission said this type of content will not only pollute the young minds but may also result in the abuse and exploitation of children. The commission took action based on a complaint that alleged that the series normalises minors indulging in casual sex and drug abuse. "Netflix should take extra precaution while streaming any content in respect of the children or for the children and shall also refrain themselves from getting into such things," the commission said in its notice. Also read: 'Bombay Begums' review: Powerful performances with an over-used narration "Therefore, you are directed to look into this matter and immediately stop streaming of this series and furnish a detailed action report within 24 hours, failing which the Commission will be constrained to initiate appropriate action pursuant to the provisions of Section 14 of the CPCR (Commission for Protection of Child Rights) Act, 2005," the commission said. The notice comes weeks after the Indian government stated that it is in the process of framing a code to regulate OTT (over-the-top) platforms. The government is looking at monitoring content in order to remove anything that can be deemed as objectionable on the digital space. 'Bombay Begums' delves into the lives of five women of varied age groups and from different sections of society who all want different things in life. A 13-year-old girl serves as a narrator to the story. The series has been directed by Alankrita Srivastava and stars Pooja Bhatt, Amruta Subhash, Shanana Goswami, Rahul Bose and others.

Netflix asked to stop streaming 'Bombay Begums' over inappropriate portrayal of children 