Madhya Pradesh High Court
Surendra @ Shailu S/O Rakesh Rathore ... vs State Of M.P. on 31 May, 2024
Author: Prem Narayan Singh
Bench: Prem Narayan Singh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
ON THE 31 st OF MAY, 2024
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2319 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
SURENDRA @ SHAILU S/O RAKESH RATHORE MINOR
THROUGH GUARDIAN MOTHER RAMKANYABAI W/O
RAKESH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
LABOR NEAR RAM MANDIR, HARIGEN MOHALLA,
JHARDA DIST. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(MS. ARCHANA MAHESHWARI - ADVOCATE)
AND
STATE OF M.P. STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH
P.S. NAGDA DIST. UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
( SHRI SAMEER VERMA - PANEL LAWYER)
This revision coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
The revision petition under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care &
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for brevity 'the Act of 2015') has been
directed against judgment dated 24.04.2024 passed in Criminal Case
No.86/2024, by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, District Ujjain
whereby the learned Court has affirmed the order dated 10.04.2024 passed by
Juvenile Justice Board, Ujjain in Cr. Case No.184/2024 rejecting the application
for custody of the child in conflict.
2 . As per the prosecution story, the allegations against the child in
conflict is that he was travelling in the vehicle from which 90 bulk liters of
country made liquor has been seized.
3. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the application before
the Juvenile Justice Board was preferred, but the same was dismissed and later
on, the appeal preferred by the guardian of the minor, was also dismissed by
the impugned order by ignoring the act and conduct of the minor by the learned
appellate Court. It is further submitted that there is no threat to the life of the
juvenile and there is no chance that the juvenile will affect by the society of
miscreants/bad persons.
4. It is also submitted that the petitioner (mother) of the minor
undertakes and assures the Court that she will take care of the juvenile in
accordance with law. It is further submitted that as per the report of Probation
Officer, the conduct of the juvenile is in accordance with law. It is further
submitted that there is no likelihood that minor would come into contact of any
known criminal or his release would expose him to moral, physical or
psychological danger or otherwise defeat the ends of justice.
5. On the other hand learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer
contending that there are clear allegations of commission of offence with the co-
accused. Therefore, the learned appellate Court has not committed any illegality
and in keeping the juvenile in Child Reformation Center considering the nature
of crime committed by him. The impugned order passed by the learned
appellate Court cannot be termed as illegal or against the material available on
record. Under these circumstances, they prayed for rejection of this revision
petition.
6. Considering the contentions raised by both the parties and also
perused the order and documents filed by the parties.
7. Provisions contained under Section 12 of 'the Act of 2015' lays down
that if a juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before the Board,
such persons shall not be 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 this
release would defeat the ends of justice, for whatsoever offence he is charged,
shall be released on bail except in the above circumstances. Of course, bail
application of juvenile can be refused for the above grounds or any one of the
grounds existed. Thus, the explanation would be that he shall not be so
released, if there appears reasonable ground for believing that the release is
likely to bring home into association with any known criminal or expose him to
moral, physical or psychological danger, or that would defeat the ends of
justice.
8 . From the perusal of the record, the act of the juveniles is not clear
now and juvenile has participated in the offence or not, it shall only be decided
by proper trial only. The appeal was dismissed by the learned appellate Court
on the ground that there exist reasonable grounds under the sections for
believing that the release of the juveniles would defeat the ends of justice.
However, it cannot be lost sight of the fact that such provision is indicative of
the intent of the legislature that a child conflicted with law should not be kept in
custody normally except under the circumstances narrated under the section 12
of 'the Act of 2015'. The words ends of justice should be confined to both
facts, which shows that the grant of bail does not likely result in injustice. Under
these circumstances, refusal of bail would be against the intention of 'The Act
of 2015'. Therefore, taking into consideration of all the aforesaid facts coupled
with the facts of case, in the opinion of this Court, ends of justice would be
served if the juvenile be released on bail and sent to custody of his guardian.
9. Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed and judgment
dated 24.04.2024 passed in Cr.A. No.86/2024, by the learned 6th Additional
Sessions Judge, Ujjain is hereby set aside and it is directed that the juvenile shall
be released on bail and handed over to the custody of his respective guardian
on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy five thousand
only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
Juvenile Justice Board, Ujjain subject to the condition that the Guardian of the
juvenile shall keep watch over him during the period of his release and keep him
present on each and every date of appearance before the Juvenile Justice Board
and shall not allow the applicant to come into association with any
known/unknown criminals and further ensure that his release shall not defeat the
ends of justice in any manner.
1 0 . I t is further directed that Probation Officer shall periodically keep
vigilance over the child conflicted with law and observe his activities and in the
event of any diversity noticed by him, he shall inform the Juvenile Justice Board
and the Board, after proper enquiry, if found the activities of the conflicted
child adverse to law, may send the juvenile to Child Reformation Center and in
such condition, this order regarding granting of child custody shall stand
automatically cancelled without further reference to this Court.
11. Resultantly, this revision petition stands allowed and disposed of in
the manner indicated herein-above, thereby setting aside the impugned orders.
Certified copy as per Rules.
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH)
JUDGE
sumathi
