Allahabad High Court
Jitendra vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 August, 2015
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2179 of 2015
Revisionist :- Jitendra
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Pawan Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate,Deepak Kr.Srivastava
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Pawan Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Deepak Kumar Srivastavba, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri R.K.Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the Stae.
Admittedly, the revisionist is a juvenile and special provisions are there for the bail of a juvenile.
Learned A.G.A. did not raise any dispute with regard to the aforesaid facts.
Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 provides the provisions as to when bail to a juvenile can be refused.
"12 Bail of Juvenile.--(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person but he shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice.
(2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.
(3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section(1) by the Board, it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of inquiry regarding him as may be specified in the order."
In view of the aforesaid provision, the bail application of the juvenile can be rejected only on the existence of the aforementioned grounds enumerated in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
Apart from it in the case of Amit Kumar Vs. State of U.P. [2010 (71) ACC 209 (Alld)] and Naurang (minor) Vs. State of U.P. [2010 (71) ACC 255 (Alld), this Court has expressed the similar view and has granted bail to the juvenile offender in heinous offence. Seriousness of offence is no ground to reject the bail to a juvenile.
Keeping in view the aforementioned legal position and the fact that in this case no such conditions exists, on the basis of which the bail application of a juvenile can be dismissed, therefore, the revision deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. The order dated 13.3.2015 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Shahjahanpur in Case No. 77 of 2014 (State Vs. Jitendra) arising out of Case Crime No. 797 of 2014 under Sections 498A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur is hereby set aside.
In these circumstances, revisionist is entitled for bail.
Let revisionist-Jitendra be enlarged on bail in Case No. 77 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 797 of 2014 under Sections 498A, 304-B I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Jalalabad, District Shahjahanpur, on furnishing a personal bond by the father/legal guardian of Jitendra and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board to the effect that he will not come into contact with other offenders.
Order Date :- 10.8.2015
Ashish Pd.
