Can Child Care Homes Record Caste And Religion Of Minors? Allahabad High Court Reviews Practice Amid JJ Act Amendment Proposal

The Uttar Pradesh government recently informed the Allahabad High Court that it has written to the Centre proposing amendments to the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and the Juvenile Justice Rules, 2016, in the backdrop of the court’s scrutiny of the practice of recording caste and religion details of minors in state-run child care homes.

The submission came in a habeas corpus petition filed by a man seeking production of his minor sister, who he alleged was in illegal custody of private respondents.

Placing on record a letter dated December 2, 2025 issued by the Special Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh, to the Secretary, Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India, the Additional Government Advocate (AGA) submitted that the state has suggested amendments to the relevant provisions of the 2015 Act and the 2016 Rules.

The government’s communication was brought to the court’s notice after the proceedings had, over several hearings, expanded beyond the immediate custody dispute to examine the documentation practices followed in Rajkiya Balgrih (Balika), a state-run child care institution.

On February 3, the AGA, on instructions, further informed the court that the minor is presently in the safe custody of her brother. Recording the submission, court observed that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending and disposed of the case.

Earlier in the proceedings, court recorded that it had expressed concern regarding the mentioning of caste and religion of minor children kept at Rajkiya Balgrih (Balika), despite specific directions issued in an earlier criminal proceeding under Section 482 CrPC.

Court directed the District Probation Officer to examine a government notification issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh dispensing with the requirement of mentioning caste in official documents, and to obtain instructions from the Secretary, Child Welfare Department.

Subsequently, instructions placed before the court from the Directorate of Women Welfare indicated that there was no specific direction requiring the department to mention caste and religion of minors kept at the institution. It was also recorded that such information, if maintained in departmental records, was kept confidential and utilised solely for rehabilitation purposes. 

Court then directed senior officials of the Directorate of Women Welfare to appear through video conferencing to assist it on the necessity of recording caste and religion details in records prepared by counsellors and the District Probation Officer.

After multiple hearings and exchanges of instructions, the custody issue stood resolved with the state’s statement that the minor was safely residing with her brother, leading the court to close the habeas corpus proceedings. 

Case Title: Sunita Minor And Another vs. State Of U.P. And 8 Others

Judgment Date: February 3, 2026

Bench: Justice Vinod Diwakar