New Delhi: Sixteen-year-old Nitin (name changed) from Nausena Madaiya village in the Shahjahanpur district of Uttar Pradesh has been in the custody of the Uttar Pradesh Police for the past two months. He was reportedly arrested on April 14 following the Noida labour protest.His family alleges that although he is a minor, Nitin was treated like an adult inmate and confined in Kasna Jail, located in Greater Noida. Now, after a medical examination has confirmed that he is a minor and the court granted him bail on May 29, he is yet to secure his release because his family is unable to afford the bail sum of Rs 45,000.Nitin, who was employed at a grocery store in Noida, is from an extremely poor family. His father succumbed to illness in 2024. The family now includes Nitin, his mother and two brothers. His elder brother, 18-year-old Dinesh, works at a brick kiln in Punjab alongside their mother, whereas the younger brother is only 13 years old.Dinesh said that Nitin was working at the grocery store in the Bhangel area of Noida when he was arrested. Also read: Too Little, Too Late: Wage Hikes, Welfare Promises and the Machinery of ControlNitin’s lawyer, Manik Gupta, told The Wire Hindi, “On April 14, Nitin received a phone call informing him that there was a parcel for him. Although he stated that he hadn’t placed any order for a parcel, he was asked to step outside. Nitin said that when he reached the designated spot, he found the police there, who immediately took him into custody.”After being detained alongside adults in the jail for almost two months, he was transferred to a juvenile facility on June 12. An ossification test, which is used to medically assess age, was carried out. Although the results confirmed that he was a minor, he remained in jail for another six days.Both Nitin’s lawyer and Dinesh allege that after being detained, he was moved to another police facility where he was subjected to assault and later made to sign certain documents. The Wire Hindi has not been able to independently verify the allegation of assault.“Nitin told me that the police had beaten him for a long time and even broke a baton during the assault,” said Dinesh.The caseIn April, workers in Noida staged protests demanding salary hikes and improved working conditions. The protest escalated into violence on April 13. Workers and activists allege that the police used force without provocation, whereas the police claims that the mob had become unruly, necessitating action to bring the situation under control.Nitin was detained in this case. Several serious sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) have been invoked against him in FIR (number 165/2026) registered at the Noida Phase-2 police station. The charges include unlawful assembly, rioting, obstructing public servants in the discharge of their duties, violence, damage to public and private property and other related offenses. In addition to Sections 109(1), 191(1), 191(2), 121(2), 132, 133, 125, 127(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 324(6), 61(2), 326(F), 190, 191(3), 324(4), 324(5), and 326(G) of the BNS, the FIR also invokes Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act.Lawyer Gupta said that he learned about Nitin’s case while appearing in court on May 15 regarding the cases of other workers arrested in connection with the protest.Gupta said, “The other accused told me there was a boy, a minor. When I spoke to him, he mentioned that he was sixteen years old. I couldn’t understand how he was being remanded under standard criminal procedures given his status as a minor.”Nitin’s family and lawyer assert that he was not even present at the protest.Age mismatchNitin’s Aadhaar card was submitted in the court, along with an application, according to which his date of birth is January 1, 2010. This puts his age at 16 years. Nitin’s Aadhaar record shows he is 16 years old. Photo by arrangement.Later, the bone ossification test conducted on June 4 also estimated his age at around 16 years.Meanwhile, another major inconsistency has emerged.As per Nitin’s counsel, his age was recorded as 25 years in the documents pertaining to his arrest and subsequent remand, or the legal procedure to keep an arrestee in custody rather than release them. This error in recording his age is the reason why he was placed in jail as an adult offender.As to how the police assessed Nitin’s age as 25 years despite the only document he possessed – an Aadhar card, pictured above, which states his age as 16 years – it is a mystery.Gupta said, “The law stipulates that any claim regarding an individual being a minor must be promptly investigated. But, in this case, a child remained in jail for weeks.”Gupta added that as soon as he was informed about Nitin’s age, he filed a claim with the court and the Juvenile Justice Board concerning his age. Nevertheless, the ossification test was conducted approximately 20 days later.Legal help received after a monthAccording to the application submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board, after Nitin’s arrest, his family was not informed, nor was he allowed to reach out to any legal counsel. The application states that the present lawyer met him on May 15, nearly a month post-arrest, at which point he finally received legal representation.In the application, the family has also alleged that Nitin was brought to the court with his hands chained. Gupta has confirmed to The Wire Hindi that he personally saw Nitin tied in chains.This when handcuffing a minor is a violation of the Juvenile Justice Act as well as the guidelines of the Supreme Court.The application states that presenting a 16-year-old child in chains and shackles contravenes Rule 12(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model Rules, 2016, the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules), 1985 as well as the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Prem Shankar Shukla vs Delhi Administration. The Supreme Court, in its ruling, had prohibited the use of handcuffs as an inhumane practice.The Wire Hindi has sent questions regarding this matter to the officer in-charge of Noida Phase-2 police station, but a response has not been received by the time this article was published. The report will be updated once the response is received.Bail granted by courtOn May 29, a sessions court of Gautam Buddha Nagar granted bail to Nitin. In its order, the court stated that Nitin’s name was not mentioned in the FIR. The court also observed that no CCTV footage, video or photographic evidence was produced on record to establish his specific role in the incident.Further, the court said that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses documented in the record do not clearly establish Nitin’s involvement. Based on these observations, the court granted the teenager bail.Also read: Vikas and Fear: What the Noida Protest Reveals About Labour And Democracy in Uttar PradeshAfter obtaining bail in connection with FIR number 165/2026 and securing proof that he is a minor (the ossification test), Gupta reached the Juvenile Justice Board with Nitin’s application. That is where he discovered that yet another case had been filed against him under FIR number 164/2026.In FIR 164/2026, Nitin has been booked under Sections 109(1), 191(1), 191(2), 191(3), 121(2), 132, 333, 125, 115(2), 127(2), 351(3), 352 and 61(2) of the BNS along with laws relating to damage to public property. Charges have also been levelled under Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act.Gupta said that he filed an application for bail in the Juvenile Justice Board regarding FIR number 164/2026, the second police case, but that application was not accepted.‘The Juvenile Justice Board told us that they can accept the application only when the file of the minor is officially transferred to them,’ said Gupta.In custody despite bailNow, despite the bail order, Nitin remains in custody. Fourteen days have passed, in which he has only been transferred from the adult prison at Kasna to a juvenile home.According to his Juvenile Justice Board application, Nitin’s family is so poor that they are unable to provide the two sureties of Rs 50,000 and a sum of Rs 45,000 required for bail. It is noted in the application that the family neither has any property nor any savings or any consistent income. His mother is a labourer at a brick kiln.Previously, the bail amount was set at Rs 50,000. Advocate Gupta had filed an application before the court to reduce this amount. However, only Rs 5,000 was reduced, and the family is unable to afford the bail bond.Based on this, the lawyer petitioned the Juvenile Justice Board for Nitin’s release on personal bond.The application filed on June 8 states that Nitin is a minor, has already been granted bail and under Section 12(4) of the Juvenile Justice Act, he ought to be released on personal bond. The application also says that if a child is unable to meet the bail conditions, the board should facilitate his release by modifying those conditions.Dinesh told The Wire Hindi, “We are a very poor family. We don’t have any savings. Our earnings barely sustain us. After our father’s death, our family has become destitute.”Gupta pointed out that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Moti Ram vs State of Madhya Pradesh (a case from 1978) stated that “the conditions of bail should be decided keeping in mind the economic reality of the accused and such conditions should not be imposed which in practice would amount to denial of bail”.“Despite getting bail, keeping a child in jail only because of financial constraints is contrary to the basic principles of justice,” Gupta said.“The most tragic aspect is that a child was initially kept in adult prison and then even after being granted bail, he continues to be in jail solely because his family is poor,” he added. Translated from Hindi by Naushin Rehman.This article was originally published on The Wire Hindi.