Back
2025 Supreme(All) 2292
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJAY BHANOT, J.
Smt. Rekha - Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. - Opposite Party
Criminal MISC. Bail Application No. 25993 of 2024
Decided On : 09-04-2025
For the Applicant : Rahul Upadhyay
For the Opposite Party : G.A., R.P.S. Chauhan.
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail and Child Rights
Act Referred
JUVENILE JUSTICE CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN ACT : S.2(14), S.30, S.31, S.37
RIGHT TO EDUCATION ACT : S.13, S.14, S.15, S.2(d), S.4
UTTAR PRADESH JAIL MANUAL : R.339(f)
Headnote
(B) Bail Jurisdiction - The court recognized the collateral damage to children when a parent is denied bail, asserting the necessity of considering children's welfare in bail decisions, thereby reinforcing the principle that the rights of children must be upheld even in the context of criminal proceedings. (Paras 5, 7, 86)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, a mother, sought bail while her 5-year-old daughter was incarcerated with her, raising concerns about the child's rights to education and holistic development. (Paras 1, 2)
Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the state must ensure the rights of children residing in jails are realized, including access to education and a supportive environment. (Paras 4, 113, 114)
Issues: The primary issues addressed were the rights of children residing in jails and the state's responsibility to provide adequate support systems. (Paras 5, 9)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rights of children must be prioritized in bail considerations, and that the state must implement comprehensive support systems for children in jails. (Paras 4, 86)
Result: Bail application dismissed, but directions provided for the welfare of the child. (Paras 94, 114)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. rights of children confined with parents in jail. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments regarding the rights of children and state obligations. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. legal issues and implications of bail denial on children. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. constitutional provisions and statutory frameworks for children's rights. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. court's orders and directions for the welfare of children in jail. (Para 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119) |
JUDGMENT :
(Ajay Bhanot, J.)
Ref: Criminal Misc. Correction Application No. 2 of 2025
Heard.
Correction application is allowed.
Necessary correction has been incorporated in the order dated 20.01.2025. The correct order shall read as under:
The judgement is being structured in the following conceptual framework to facilitate the discussion:
| I | Introduction | ||||||||||||
| II | Submissions of learned counsels for the parties | ||||||||||||
| III | Legal issues arising in this case & Bail Jurisdiction | ||||||||||||
| IV | Children:
| ||||||||||||
| V | Children in Jail : Invisible trial and caged childhood — A Study | ||||||||||||
| VI | Statutory Framework: | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| VII |
| ||||||||||||
| VIII | Implementation of Law and Role of Courts : Junaid Vs. State of U.P., 2021 (6) ADJ 511 and Rajendra Prasad Vs. State of U.P., Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 30292 of 2024 | ||||||||||||
| IX | Order in Bail Application
| ||||||||||||
| X | Circulation of copies for compliance |
I. Introduction
1. Rights of children who get confined to jail with their parents consequent to rejection of bail of the latter arise for consideration in this case (apart from other grounds for bail).
II. Submissions of learned counsels for the parties
2. Shri Rahul Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant made the following submissions:
i. The applicant’s daughter who is 5 years of age is residing with her in prison after her incarceration. The rights of the applicant’s child flowing from Article 21-A of the Constitution of India read with other beneficial legislations are being violated on account of her confinement in prison.
ii. The prison does not have requisite support systems to ensure the holistic growth of the minor child as contemplated in the aforesaid provisions of law.
iii. In view of the above the jail stay will cast a shadow on the child’s life and mar her future.
iv. The applicant is entitled to bail on this ground alone.
Submissions on behalf of State
3. Shri Ashok Mehta, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I made the following submissions:
I. The State Government have an unconditional commitment to provide a congenial environment and build adequate support systems as contemplated under the Constitution and in various beneficial legislations for children who reside in jail consequent to imprisonment of their,[their” is being used as a gender inclusive Pronoun in place of “his” or “her”. “Their” is used as a singular in such situations. [see : Time (Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Gender-Neutral Pronouns)]parent.
II. The State Government shall make all endeavours to realize the fundamental rights of the said class of children as enunciated in holdings of constitutional courts and the rights vested
