LexMUNNA & OTHERS ETC. versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
47 MtJNNA & OTHERS ETC. v. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ETC. January 19, 1982 [P.N. BHAOWATI AND R.S. PATHAK, JJ.] Constitution of India 1950, Article 32-Juvenile undertriaJ priso~rs-111- treatmtnt ana exploitation in jail-Newspaper report-Writ petition filed seeking relief-A/legations denied by jailor-Al/egations h"eld seTious-Writ petition cannot be summarily dismissed. Crime and Punishment-Juvenile delinquency-Inhibition against sending children to jail-Person under sixteen years of agt-Not to he sent to Jail- ·Detention in Children's Home or 'Place of safe'-Necessity of-Duty of Magistrates. Uttar Pradesh Childrtn Act 1951, ss. 2(9), 29, 30, 32 and 33 & Uttar Pradesh Children's Rules 1962, Ru/ts U and 15. Child-Arrtsted for offenct-Not rtleastd on bail-Cannot be sent to jail-Detention in 'place of safety' or Children's Homt- Statutory requirement-Government to implement provisions of A.ct-Setting up plaCes for detention for chiJdren-Necessity of. Three writ petitions wCre filed alleging on tbe basis of a news report in the Indian Express dated 2nd December, 1981 that one Mr. Madhu Mehta had visited the Kanpur Central Jail incognito and found several juvenile undertrial priso~rs lodged there even though there was a Cbildten's Home in Kanpur, and that these juvenile prisoners were being sexually exploited by adult prisoners. Notice was issued to the State of Uttar Pradesh. In the meanwhile a writ petition was filed in the High Court of Allahabad seeking relief in respect of these juvenile undertrial prisoners. The High Court decided to investigate and by its order dated 18th December, 1981 directed the Sessions Judge of Kanpur to visit the Jail and to report whether any dctcou below the age of 16 years was detaiOed, whether any detenu below the age of 21 years was being kept under fetters, and whether they were subjected to torture by adult prisoners as alleged in the writ petition. The Sessions Judge visited the Jail on 21st December, 1981 and submitted his report dated 22nd December, 1981 to the High Court. The report stated that there were admittedly seven juvenile undertrial prisoners below the age of sixteen in the jail and that one Des Raj was transferred to the Children's Home on 19th December, 1981 and that the rest of the prisoners happened to be released on different dates between 7th and 16th December, 1981 before the order of the High Court on 18th December, 1981. .The Sessions Judge in Annexure •A' to his report ·gave the names, ages and other particulars of 84 undertriaJ prisoners who according to the jail report were above 16 but below 21 years of age and stated that he had nine from among these undertrial prisoners examined by the Chief Medical Officer and appended the report as Annexure 'B'. He fUrther reported about the general ignorance of the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Children's Act, l~SI and stated that he bad instructed the Jail Superin- A B c D E F G H A B c D E F G H 48 SUPRBMB COURT REPORTS [1982] 3 s.c.e. tendent and the Jail Doctor that in case of any doubt about the age of an under .. trial pr)soner they should instead of relying upon the Police papers with regard to age, obtain the opinion of the Chief Medical Officer. In the writ petitions, it was HELO : 1. The allegations made in the writ petition are serious. lf correct they disclose to what utter depth of depravity man can sink. The Court cannot abdicate its c_onstitutional duty of ensuring human dignity to the juvenile under. trial prisoners and summarily throw out the writ petitions me'rcly on the basis of a denial made by the Assistant Jailer. Tho instant case must be investigated not only in the interest of fair administration of justice but 3.lso for enforcing the basic human rights of undertrial prisoners who are alleged to have been ill- treated. [53 D-E] 2. Juvenile delinquency is, by and large, a product of social and economic mal-adjustment. Even if it is found that juveniles have committed any offence they cannot be allowed to be mal-treated. They do not shed their fundamental rights when they enter the jail. [53 E·F] 3. The object of punishment being reformation, no social objective ca.n be gained by sending juveniles to jails where they would come into contact with hardened criminals and lose whatever sensitivity they may have to finer and nobler sentiments, That is the reason why Children Acts are enacted by States all over the countr
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.