CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

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