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
| 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
Avinash Mehrotra Vs. Union of India and others
Pratap Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Sheela Barse v. Children's Aid Society
Lakshmi Kant Pandey Vs. Union of India
Sumpurnanand Vs. State of U.P.
Oil & Natural Gas Commission Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Elizabeth Jacob Vs. District Collector, Idukki and others
The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Sri Yamin and others
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.