The has voiced serious concern over the quality of Uttar Pradesh's state education system after a girl who had studied up to Class V told the court she could not read a Hindi newspaper or write anything beyond her name. The observations came during a petition filed by a man who had eloped with the minor, who later gave birth to his child. While the court allowed the petition based on an indicating she was approximately 18 years old, it sharply questioned the state's failure to ensure meaningful education for the girl.
A division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev interacted with the girl in court on
. When asked if she could read a Hindi newspaper, she answered in the negative. She could only write her name. The court noted that according to state records, the girl had studied up to Class V.
"It is equally shocking that a child who, according to the record and as stated by the learned counsel for the State, had studied up to Class V, was nevertheless unable to read a newspaper in her mother tongue,"
the bench observed.
The court added that the quality of the state education system was,
"to put it mildly, a matter of serious concern."
These remarks came in the context of a broader examination of the social realities surrounding the case. The girl's father, an illiterate labourer earning ₹10,000–12,000 per month as the sole earner for a family of four children and aged parents, told the court he had never attended school.
Court's Concern Over Education Quality
The bench emphasised that expecting a child of about 15 years to understand the legal consequences of her conduct required the state to first ensure she receives meaningful education.
"Questions inevitably arise as to why the prosecutrix attended school only up to Class V. Why was the State unable to ensure that she continued her education, or otherwise compel her to remain in school until she completed Class XII?"
the court asked.
The court acknowledged that a considerable section of the population may not be aware of their legal rights or duties. While , the implementation of law must be examined in the context of the circumstances in which people live, it said.
Request for POCSO Act Amendments
Going beyond the immediate
plea, the court requested the
to recommend suitable amendments to the
, concerning minor couples. The bench observed that strictly applying the Act in certain circumstances could produce consequences that
"advance injustice rather than justice"
, particularly where a relationship has resulted in the birth of a child.
Among possible suggestions, the court said special judges should be given adequate discretion in exceptional cases to consider the circumstances while determining punishment. It also asked the Law Commission to examine alternative forms of punishment, including , where a family formed in ignorance of the POCSO Act risks being unnecessarily disrupted.
Allowed, Trial Court to Decide
On the merits of the petition, the court noted that no school-issued or municipal date-of-birth certificate was on record. Instead, an assessed the girl's age at approximately 18 years. Referring to , the court held the girl was a major. Because she expressed a desire to live with the man, the court allowed the petition and permitted her to leave with him.
Importantly, the bench clarified that the trial court dealing with the pending POCSO case would not be bound by its factual observations in the proceedings. The trial court must decide the matter strictly in accordance with law and solely on the basis of evidence led before it.
The next development will be the Law Commission's response to the court's request for suggested amendments, which could potentially reshape how POCSO cases involving minor couples are handled across India. Meanwhile, the trial court will proceed independently with the pending POCSO proceedings against the man.
education system quality - POCSO Act amendments - habeas corpus POCSO - illiteracy and legal awareness - age determination ossification test
