Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Interim Bail to Mother Who Gave Birth in Custody, Emphasizes Importance of Maternal Care and Child Welfare

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted interim bail to Reena Kumari, a mother who gave birth to a child while in custody. The court emphasized the crucial role of maternal care and the welfare of the child, highlighting the need to protect the rights and well-being of newborns. Justice Anoop Chitkara, presiding over the case, stated, "No new mother and no pregnant woman should be subjected to restraints of any kinds, be it during the pre-natal period, labor and delivery, or the postpartum period." The judgment underscores the court's commitment to safeguarding the rights of women and children.

Reena Kumari had been arrested and detained following allegations that she had pushed her eight-year-old son into a canal, resulting in his tragic death. The petitioner contended that the incident was an unfortunate accident and that she was being falsely implicated due to matrimonial discord. Her counsel argued that her pre-trial incarceration would cause irreparable injustice to both the petitioner and her family.

Recognizing the significance of maternal health and the impact it has on fetal development, the court referred to international standards and constitutional provisions that advocate for non-custodial sentences for pregnant women and women with dependent children. It cited Rule 64 of the United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders, which emphasizes the preference for non-custodial sentences when possible and appropriate, ensuring the best interests of the child.

Justice Chitkara highlighted the urgent need to consider the social and emotional well-being of both the mother and the child during the early stages of development. The court remarked, "Every newborn is an equal stakeholder on the planet, endowed with the same inherent rights of Aazadi, i.e., dignity, freedom, and security." It stressed the potential negative impact of confinement on a child's ability to form bonds and engage in proper social interactions.

Considering the circumstances of the case and the fact that Reena Kumari had recently given birth, the court found no justifiability for further pre-trial incarceration. However, it imposed stringent conditions to address concerns regarding the investigation, evidence tampering, and the possibility of the accused influencing witnesses. The court granted interim bail to the petitioner for six months, subject to specific terms and conditions.

This landmark judgment by the Punjab and Haryana High Court reinforces the importance of maternal care and the protection of children's rights. It sets a precedent for prioritizing the well-being of mothers and their newborns during the judicial process, ensuring their fundamental rights are upheld.

D/d. 29.05.2023.

Reena Kumari VS State of Punjab 

Latest Legal News