ANIL DEV SINGH, J. ( 1 ) IT is alleged in the applications that the petitioner, a widow having seven children, was arrested on 15th February, 1991 in connection with FIR No-59/81 under sections 20,61 and 85 of the NDPS Act. ln para 8 of the application, being Cr. M. 2144/93, it is stated that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than two and a half years and her children are being neglected as there is no one to look after them. In the application it is prayed that the State should be directed to provide food, shelter and education to her children. ( 2 ) IN a situation like this, where children of a single parent are left alone due to the incarceration of the parent, it is the bounden duty of the State to provide for such children, who have no one even to wipe their tears,respond to their smiles or to prevent them from taking to wayward life. These children cannot be forgotten and abandoned. If they are being deprived of the hands which feed, protect and love them, it will not be just, fair and reasonable to leave them without securing for them, the basic necessities of life including food, education and shelter. What will happen to the children who see a heartless world around them in which they are not wanted and they do not receive anything from the society except deprivation,should be the concern of the State. ( 3 ) WHEN the only parent is tucked away in jail the State must rehabilitate the children. The State may be totally justified in fettering a person s liberty but at the same time the State must be mindful of the fact that be may have children with none to look after them except him. While punishing such a person by placing him in custody, the blow to the children must be softened. By depriving the parent of his liberty the State is also depriving the child of the means of his subsistence and sustenance. The State must in such circumstances replenish the said means by providing the bare necessities of life to the child. It is well settled that right to life under Article 20 of the Constitution means something more than survival or animal existence. The State must in such circumstances replenish the said means by providing the bare necessities of life to the child. It is well settled that right to life under Article 20 of the Constitution means something more than survival or animal existence. Right to life is a whole some right which makes life meaningful and complete including life which is to be lived with dignity. In Francis Coralie Mullin vs. The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi and others, AIR 1981 S. C. 746, the Supreme Court while applying Article 21 of the Constitution to a prisoner held that the right to life would include right to live with all that goes along with it including bare necessities of life. If prisoners have these rights surely their children can not be worse off than them. ( 4 ) ARTICLE 23 of the Constitution prohibits traffic in human beings and begar and other similar types of forced labour. Contravention of this provision altracts penal punishment. A child whose parent has been packed off to jail will have to fend for himself owing to hunger and poverty. This will compel him to undertake all sorts of work. Even undignified and dehumanising labour can be forced upon him because of impoverishment or application of physical force. If the child is forced into such a situation by the State, it must become a provider for the child. ( 5 ) AGAIN under Article 24 of the Constitution no child below the age of 14 years can be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment. The child of a detainee, with no one else to look up to tor help is liable to be exploited by his employer and any work can lie extracted out of him as his will can be easily dominated. Thus the State, which is impervious to the welfare of a separated child, compels him to undertake hazardous jobs. This tyranny on innocent children must end as otherwise the society will be creating frankensteins o fwhich already there is no dearth of in the society. ( 6 ) IT is a right of the child, guaranteed by Articles 21, 23 and 24, to be looked alter, cared for and nourished both will food and knowledge, one for sustaining his body and the other for the enlightenment of his siul. ( 6 ) IT is a right of the child, guaranteed by Articles 21, 23 and 24, to be looked alter, cared for and nourished both will food and knowledge, one for sustaining his body and the other for the enlightenment of his siul. ( 7 ) ACCORDINGLY, I direct that the State must take appropriate steps for setting up adequate number of Homes for children in Delhi for looking after the children of the prisoners and detenus, incase there is no one to look after them, and to provide them,with the basic amenities of life like food, shelter, clothing, education and everything which makes life meaningful and worth living. This direction will be applicable to the category of cases specified above. ( 8 ) THE respondent is directed to formulate a Scheme and to locale funds for implementation of the same. ( 9 ) IN order to effectively deal with the situation, it is necessary that the secretary , Social Welfare Board should appear in the Court on the next dale. The office will inform the Secretary Social Welfare Board, Delhi Administration, Delhi others order through a special messanger. ( 10 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondent submits that in case there is no one to look after the children of the petitioner, they can be sent to one of the Children Homes which the Delhi Administration is running for certan categories of children. ( 11 ) LEARNED counsel for the resplendent will have an enquiry made with regard to the question whether the petitioner s children are staying alone or whether there is a relative who can look alter them. ( 12 ) PRODUCTION warrants be issued fur appearance of the petitioner on the next dale. List the matter on 10th September, 1993.