Madhya Pradesh High Court
Child In Conflict With Law Through ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19682
1 CRR-2492-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
ON THE 28th OF JULY, 2025
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2492 of 2025
CHILD IN CONFLICT WITH LAW THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN
FATHER PADAMSINGH PURVIYA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Govind Pal Singh Songara - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Rajendra Suryawanshi - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This criminal revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is preferred being aggrieved by the
judgment dated 25.05.2024 passed in CRA No.1579/2024 by VIth
Additional Sessions Judge, Shajapur, MP arising out of order dated
15.04.2024 in proceedings No.39/2024 pending before Juvenile Justice
Board,Shajapur, District Shajapur in connection with Crime No.92/2024
under Section 294/307, 302 of the IPC registered at Police Station Kalapipal,
District Shajapur whereby an application for Supurdagi for child in conflict
with law has been rejected.
2. Facts in brief are that child in conflict with law was apprehended
regarding incident dated 29.02.2024 in which one Arvind succumbed to
injuries inflicted by child in conflict with law by knife.
3. The child in conflict with law was 17 years & 10 months at the time
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19682
2 CRR-2492-2025
of incident. The application under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been rejected on the ground that
child in conflict with law aged 17 years & 10 months and has sufficient
knowledge of the consequences of the act and the offence is serious in nature
and the circumstances of the case does not entitle the child in conflict with
law to be granted the benefit of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
4. Challenging the impugned order this criminal revision has been
preferred on the ground that considerations in deciding the application under
Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,
2015 has not been discussed.
Heard.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has opposed the criminal
revision and prayed for its dismissal.
6. The proviso of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is being reproduced as below:-
"Section 12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in
conflict with law--(1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is
alleged to have committed a a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended
or detained by the police or appears or 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 person:
Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19682
3 CRR-2492-2025
reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person
into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral,
physical or psychological danger or the persons release would defeat the ends
of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and
circumstances that led to such a decision.
(2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail
under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer
shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home 1 [or a place of
safety, as the case may be] in such manner as may be prescribed until the
person can be brought before a Board.
(3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by
the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a
place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the
inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.
(4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfill the conditions
of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced
before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail."
7. Social Investigation report mentions that it is in the best interest of
the child in conflict of law that he should be reintegrated in the community
and emphasized that deceased Arvind was also intoxicated at the time of
incident. The social investigation report mentions that child in conflict with
law is taking education. It is also mentioned in the report that no member of
the family of the child in conflict with law has criminal antecedent.
Accordingly, the impugned order in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner is
without considering the proviso of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
8. Accordingly, this revision succeeds and the orders of both the courts
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:19682
4 CRR-2492-2025
below are set aside and it is ordered that the child in conflict with law be
handed over to his father Padam Singh resident of village Chakrod,
Kalapipal on his furnishing supurdginama to a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand) that he be kept present before the court as and when called
and shall keep him away from exposure of any unlawful activities and to
provide proper education and create circumstances that help child in conflict
with law in becoming a good citizen.
9. With the aforesaid, this criminal revision is disposed off.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
akanksha
