Girls are still treated as commodities in 21st century: Bombay High Court grants bail to woman accused of buying one-year-old child

The Bombay High Court recently granted bail to a woman accused of buying a one-year-old child from the biological mother, who needed money as her husband was in jail. [Ashwini Babar v. State of Maharashtra & Ors].Justice SM Modak expressed “great pains” that even in the 21st century, there were incidents where girls were being treated as commodities for financial benefits.“We are in the 21st century, still there are incidents wherein the girls are treated as commodity and they have been used as a medium for financial benefits. It is highly objectionable to the principles of morality and human rights that a girl of one year is being sold by the natural mother,” the Bench observed. However, the judge noted that the ‘sale’ took place because the biological mother’s husband was behind bars and they were in need of money. .After the sale, the biological mother had managed to repay the loan to the applicant, and sought the return her child. The applicant woman and her husband, however, refused to return the child, after which a complaint was lodged against them. The couple was booked under Section 370 (trafficking of persons) of the Indian Penal Code, Section 81 (prohibition on the sale or acquisition of children for any reason) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Section 39 (money lending business without license) of the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014.The applicant moved the High Court seeking bail in the case..The Court granted bail, noting that the applicant had two children of her own. “The applicant is also having two minor children. The baby which was sold is with her (biological) parents. One does not know when the trial is to be started and will be finished. There is no need to detain the applicant behind the bars till the conclusion of the trial. She is also having two minor children. Their welfare also needs to be considered,” the Court said in its order. .[Read order]