SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

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

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicant : Rahul Upadhyay
For the Opposite Party : G.A., R.P.S. Chauhan.

The court established that the rights of children residing with incarcerated parents must be prioritized, necessitating comprehensive support systems to ensure their education and holistic development.

Headnote:(A) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 - Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 - Child rights and welfare in jail - Court emphasized the need for proper support systems for children residing in jails with their incarcerated parents, highlighting the violation of their rights under Article 21-A and the JJ Act. The court directed the state to create a structured program for education and holistic development of children in such circumstances. (Paras 1, 4, 9, 113-116)

(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:

IIntroduction
IISubmissions of learned counsels for the parties
IIILegal issues arising in this case & Bail Jurisdiction
IV

Children:

AGeneral
BConstitution and Children
CEducation and Holistic Development of Children
DInternational Instruments
VChildren in Jail : Invisible trial and caged childhood — A Study
VIStatutory Framework:

A

Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015, [hereinafter referred to as JJ Act]

B

The Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009,[hereinafter referred to as RIGHT TO EDUCATION ACT , 2009]

C

UP Jail Manual, 2022

D

The Model Prison Manual, 2016

E

Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987

F

Constitutional law discourse : Case Laws

VII
AChild Protection System: Duties of stakeholders & Directions
BTraining of stakeholders
CResponse of the State Government and achieving concert between different departments
VIIIImplementation 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

AMerits of bail and directions to expedite
trial
BDirections to create a child care plan and realize the rights of the applicant’s minor child
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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top