[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Juvenile 'X' Through His Father vs The State Of Jharkhand ..... ... ... on 9 December, 2025
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
(2025:JHHC:37035)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
------
Cr. Revision No. 1124 of 2024
------
Juvenile 'X' through his father ...... ... Petitioner
--Versus--
The State of Jharkhand ..... ... Opposite Party
--------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate
------
11/09.12.2025: Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for State
and the learned counsel for the informant.
2. This criminal revision has been preferred for setting aside judgment
dated 12.07.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- Cum-
Children Court, Deoghar in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 33 of 2024
whereby the learned court has been pleased to reject the criminal appeal and
has affirmed the order dated 21.06.2024 of rejection of bail in connection with
Deoghar (Town) P.S. Case No.149 of 2023, registered for the offence under
sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the
court learned, Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been
declared as a juvenile by the order dated 14.05.2024. He next submits that the
petitioner was taken into custody on 30.03.2023 and he was sent to the Remand
Home on 29.05.2024. He further submits that the petitioner is being represented
through his father. He next submits that the father of the petitioner is ready to
undertakes to keep the petitioner in good behaviour and character in future and will
prevent him from associating with any known criminal and from exposing him to
moral, physical or psychological danger and he is ready to swear an affidavit in this
regard. He then submits that the learned courts have been pleased to reject the
bail application of the petitioner considering the heinousness of the crime and
apprehended that the petitioner will be exposed to moral, physical or psychological
danger. He next submits that if the petitioner will be convicted, he will be convicted
for three years and he has already remained in custody for about two years and
nine months. He also submits that now the charge has been framed and witnesses
are being examined.
(2025:JHHC:37035)
4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that
there is likelihood of the petitioner being exposed to moral, physical or
psychological danger and he will come into the association of the dreaded criminals
and in view of that, the learned courts have rightly passed the orders.
5. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2015, deals with bail to juveniles. On perusal of Section 12 of the J.J. Act,
2015, it is crystal clear that Section 12 of the Act overrides the bail provisions as
contained in the Criminal Procedure, 1973 or any other law for time being in force.
It is further crystal clear that bail to the juvenile is a rule and refusal of the same is
an exception and juvenile can be denied bail only on the following three grounds (i)
if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring
that person into association with any known criminal, or (ii) expose the said person
to moral, physical or psychological danger, or, (iii) the person's release would defeat
the ends of justice.
6. From Section 12 of the said Act, it also transpires that seriousness of
the alleged offence or the age of the juvenile are also no relevant consideration for
denial of bail above 16 years of age and is alleged to have committed a heinous
offence is also entitled to get bail under section 12 of the Act, 2015. There is no
classification, whatsoever, provided in Section 12 of the Act, 2015 with regard to
grant of bail. Section 12 of the Act is applicable to all juveniles in conflict with law
without any discrimination of any nature.
7. The Juvenile Justice Act is based on belief that children are the future
of the society and in case they go into conflict with law under some circumstances,
they should be reformed and rehabilitated and not punished. No society can afford
to punish its children. Punitive approach towards children in conflict with law would
be self-destructive for the society. At the same time if the peeking of the child in
custody is helpful in his development and rehabilitation or protection, only then it
could be said that release of the child would defeat the ends of justice.
8. In view of above discussions, the Court is satisfied that the reasoning
and conclusion of the learned appellate court as well as Juvenile Justice Board is
that there is likelihood that the petitioner will come into the association of dreaded
criminals and there is likelihood of moral, physical and psychological danger of the
petitioner if released on bail not founded on reasonable grounds.
9. The gravity of allegation has not been properly appreciated and the
mandatory provision of Section 12 of J.J. Act, 2015 as well as other provisions
relating to the juvenile has declined to grant bail to the juvenile on the basis of
unfounded apprehension. In the absence of any material or evidence of reasonable
(2025:JHHC:37035)
grounds, it cannot be said that his release would defeat the ends of justice and
have failed to give reasons on three contingencies for declining the bail to the
revisionist. The findings recorded by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as appellate
court are based on heinousness of the offence. Thus, judgment dated 12.07.2025
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- Cum- Children Court,
Deoghar in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 33 of 2024 and the order dated
21.06.2024 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar in connection
with Deoghar (Town) P.S. Case No.149 of 2023, registered for the offence under
sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the
court learned Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar, are not sustainable in the eye of
law, and, hence, both the orders are set-aside, and the present criminal revision
petition is allowed.
10. Let the revisionist who was taken into custody on 30.03.2023 and
was sent to Remand Home on 29.05.2024, be released on bail via assurance and
surety given by his natural guardian/father, in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No.
33 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar,
under sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act, after
furnishing a personal bond on his father (Pinku Sah) with two sureties of his
relatives each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board,
Deoghar, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Natural guardian/father will furnish an undertaking that upon
release on bail the revisionist will not be permitted to go into contact or
association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any
moral, physical, or psychological danger and further that the father will
ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.
(ii) Natural guardian/father will further furnish an undertaking to
the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level
which he would be encouraged to do besides other constructive
activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and
excessive recreational pursuits.
(iii) Juvenile and natural guardian/father will report to the
Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month
commencing with the first Monday of January, 2026, and if during any
calendar month the first Monday falls on a holiday, then on the following
working day.
(iv) The Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the activities of
(2025:JHHC:37035)
the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that
would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar, on such a
periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.
11. Before imparting the judgment, it is necessary to point out that the
identity of the juvenile in the present matter has been disclosed in the impugned
judgment and order which violates the right to privacy and confidentiality of the
juvenile and against the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Shilpa Mittal v.
NCT Delhi, (2020) 2 SCC 787 wherein, it was held that the identity of the
juvenile shall not be disclosed.
12. The present revision has been filed by the revisionist through his natural
guardian/father. The memo of parties discloses the name of the juvenile. The
Registry is directed to conceal the names of the juvenile from the cause list as well
as the record of this case so that the names and identities are not disclosed as
directed by the Supreme Court in Shilpa Mittal (supra).
13 This criminal revision petition is allowed and disposed of. Pending I.A, if
any, stands disposed of.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
SI/
09.12.2025
