Legal provisions involved: Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015; Juvenile Justice Rules, 2016; High Court’s powers under habeas corpus and Article 226.

Judgement by: Allahabad High Court.

Judge/Bench: Justice Vinod Diwakar.

Facts

A habeas corpus petition was filed by a man seeking the production of his minor sister, who he claimed was in illegal custody. During the hearings, the court raised concerns about state-run child care homes in Uttar Pradesh recording the caste and religion of minors. The UP government informed the Court that the girl was now safely staying with her brother.

Key legal provisions

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015; Juvenile Justice Rules, 2016; High Court’s powers under habeas corpus and Article 226.

Issues raised

Whether child care homes should record the caste and religion of minors and if it is necessary or appropriate.

Arguments of the case

The court noted there was no rule requiring such details to be recorded. The government said that if caste or religion is noted, it is kept confidential and used only for rehabilitation. The State also told the court it had proposed amendments to the JJ Act and Rules to clarify this practice.

Judgement

Since the minor was safely with her brother, the court closed the petition. However, it emphasized reviewing the need to record caste and religion in child care records and asked senior officials to assist in examining the matter.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.