Versus State Of U.P. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Subhash Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 85 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

1. Learned A.G.A. prays for and is granted two weeks' time to obtain instructions and ensure the production of the minor corpus before this Court on the next date of hearing.

2. Put up this matter on 04.11.2025 as fresh.

A. Tripathi

AKHILESH TRIPATHI

Versus State Of U.P. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Subhash Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 88 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

1. In compliance with the order dated 6.10.2025, the corpus has been produced before this Court.

2. Due to paucity of time, the matter could not be taken up.

3. Put up on 11.11.2025 as fresh.

4. On the next date of hearing, the corpus shall remain present before this Court.

A. Tripathi

AKHILESH TRIPATHI

Versus State Of U.P. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Subhash Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 88 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

1. In compliance with the Court's order, the corpus has been produced before the Court.

2. Upon interaction with the parties, the Court is of the view that some time may be granted to the parties to arrive at a logical conclusion.

3. Put up this case as fresh on 19.11.2025.

Anil K. Sharma

ANIL KUMAR SHARMA

Versus State Of U.P. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Subhash Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 88 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

1. On the last date of hearing, the Court observed that the corpus requires a sustained training programme for the upgradation of her skills, along with motivational sessions and counselling by a qualified psychologist, so that she may be able to take an informed and appropriate decision regarding her future. Accordingly, the District Probation Officer is directed to appear in person before this Court along with the Individual Care Plan, and other documents.

2. Put up this case as fresh on 21.11.2025.

Anil K. Sharma

ANIL KUMAR SHARMA

Versus State Of U.P. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Subhash Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 88 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

1. In compliance with the order dated 19.11.2025, Shri Sarvajeet Singh, District Probation Officer, has appeared in person before this Court. His personal appearance is duly recorded.

2. The Officer prays for and is granted time to go through the recent Government Notification No. 371/Writ/ issued by छ:-पु-3-2025-1973397, the Government of Uttar Pradesh, whereby the requirement of mentioning caste in official documents has been dispensed with.

3. The Court further directs the District Probation Officer to take proper instructions from the Secretary, Child Welfare Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, in this regard.

4. Put up this matter on 26.11.2025 as fresh at 12:30 p.m.

A. Tripathi

AKHILESH TRIPATHI

Versus State Of U.P. And 8 Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Subhash Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 88 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

1. In compliance with the order dated 19.11.2025, instructions have been received from the Directorate of Women Welfare.

2. Upon perusal of the said instructions, it is observed that there is no specific direction to the department to mention the caste and religion of the minors keip at the Rajkiya Balgrih (Balika), besides other instructions with respect to the order dated 16.9.2025 passed by this Court in Application U/S 482 No.31545 of 2024 (Praveen Chetri v. State of U.P. and another). It is further noted that the information recorded in the departmental records has been kept confidential, and such information is utilized solely for the rehabilitation of the minors.

3. In view of the instructions received and the material produced before this Court, the Director and the Secretary of the Directorate of Women Welfare, Uttar Pradesh are directe