Cannot equate poverty, humble origins with criminal propensity: HC

Indian Express

31-07-2025

In a scathing critique of judicial stereotyping of individuals from socio-economically deprived backgrounds, the Punjab and Haryana High Court Thursday held that justice system must guard against equating poverty or humble origins with criminal propensity.
The court made the observation while granting bail to a juvenile, booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 after 39.73 kg ganja was recovered from him. The order overturned the decisions of the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) and the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala.
The juvenile, who was under 18 at the time of the incident, has been in custody since May 30, 2023, following his arrest in Narangarh, Ambala. According to the First Information Report dated May 30, 2023, police intercepted a motorbike cart driven by the petitioner, with his aunt as the pillion rider. A search of the cart revealed three bags containing 39.73 kg of ganja.
Lower courts had denied bail, pointing to the juvenile's residence in a slum and lack of parental care. The Juvenile Justice Board said the boy had been influenced by 'bad company' and noted his upbringing in a slum area. The Sessions Judge stated: 'The juvenile-appellant is aged about 18 years and he has developed enough maturity to understand the difference between commission of crime and commission of good deeds in the interest of society. So, he needs to be kept under the observation home.'
The high court, while hearing the juvenile's plea, rejected this approach, saying: 'To equate poverty or humble origins with criminal propensity is a fallacy that our justice system must scrupulously guard against.' He added that such assumptions 'undermine the intrinsic dignity and the overall value system of those citizens who reside in less privileged habitats.'
The court underlined that close-knit communities in low-income neighbourhoods often provide 'warmth, support, mutual care, emotional sustenance, and a sense of belonging,' which institutional settings like observation homes cannot match.
Another key factor in the court's decision was the juvenile's prolonged custody. 'The petitioner has been in custody since 30th May 2023, and the maximum sentence that can be imposed is three years. The petitioner has already undergone about two years of sentence i.e., more than half of the maximum sentence. Hence, on this very ground as well, the petitioner is entitled to bail,' the court said.
The order also addressed the juvenile's family circumstances, rejecting the lower courts' view that his orphaned status, his father deceased and mother having abandoned him, was a valid reason to deny bail. 'To view orphaned as a disqualification for bail is to disregard the very spirit of the Juvenile Justice Act, which recognizes the right of every child to be cared for by the community and the State,' the court said. 'Such a child deserves greater compassion and support, and not prolonged detention in the observation homes.'
Citing Article 14 of the Constitution, the court pointed out that the youngster's aunt had already been granted bail in January 2023, and keeping the juvenile in custody while she was free would amount to a 'gross travesty of justice.'
The judge concluded that granting bail would give the child 'another chance to course-correct, reform, and reintegrate into the community with an ideal and law-abiding citizen so that he can spend the rest of his life as a respected and dignified individual.'
The ruling, the court said, is meant only to decide the bail application and guide similar cases involving children in conflict with law.