Orissa High Court
Cicl(Child In Conflict With Law) vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 20 November, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLREV No.486 of 2024
(In the matter of an appeal under Section 401 of the Criminal
Procedure code, 1973 read with Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015)
CICL(Child in Conflict with Law) .... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha and another .... Opposite Parties
Appeared in this case:-
For Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sahoo, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Ms. Babita Kumari Sahu,
Learned Additional Government
Advocate
Appeared in this case:-
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA
JUDGMENT
Date of hearing : 13.11.2024 / date of judgment : 20.11.2024
A.C. Behera, J. This revision has been filed under Section 102 of The Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short the
„J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015‟) by the CICL being the petitioner challenging the
dismissal order of the Criminal Appeal No.17/39 of 2024 passed on dated
03.09.2024 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children‟s
Court, Nayagarh confirming an order of rejection of bail of the CICL
(petitioner in this revision) passed on dated 16.08.2024 by the Juvenile
Justice Board, Nayagarh in JUV Case No.26 of 2023 arising out of
Chandpur P.S. Case No.142 of 2024.
2. The factual backgrounds of this revision under Section 102 of the
J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, which prompted the CICL (petitioner) for filing of
the same is that, on dated 08.08.2024, the petitioner (CICL) was brought
before the Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh stating about his
involvement in different circumstances and situations with the minor
victim, for which, as per the direction of the Juvenile Justice Board,
Nayagarh, he(CICL) was sent to the observation Home. Thereafter, on
dated 16.08.2024, the Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh rejected the
prayer for bail of the CICL(petitioner) assigning the reasons that,
"when it has been specifically mentioned in the
report of the Legal-cum-Probation Officer, i.e.,
social investigation report that, the parents of the
CICL are out of home due to this matter and they are
not concerned about the CICL and when due to their
carelessness and improper guidance, the CICL was
involved in the situations, which requires proper
institutionalization and counseling, for which, if,
he(CICL) will be released on bail, it would defeat
the ends of justice and there will be danger to the life
of the victim as well as CICL, which shall not be in
the best interest of the CICL, rather it may cause any
moral or psychological danger to him."
3. For which, he (CICL) challenged the said order of rejection of his
bail passed on 16.08.2024 by the Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh
preferring an appeal under Section 101 of the J.J. (C&P) Act, 2015
before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children‟s Court,
Nayagarh being an appellant vide Criminal Appeal No.17/39 of 2024.
4. The learned appellate court dismissed that Criminal Appeal
No.17/39 of 2024 of the CICL on dated 03.09.2024 confirming the order
of rejection of his bail passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh
assigning the reasons that,
"when the parents of CICL have failed to keep him
away from his bad association and they are not
looking-after his education, then, his release on bail
will definitely expose him to physical and
psychological danger thereby defeating the ends of
justice, for which, his release on bail will adversely
affect the interest of CICL."
5. So, the CICL filed this revision under Section 102 of the J.J.
(C&P) Act, 2015 being the petitioner challenging the above dismissal
order of his Criminal Appeal No.17/39 of 2024 passed on dated
03.09.2024 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children‟s
Court, Nayagarh.
6. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State(Opposite Party
No.1) only, as, the so-called aggrieved person, i.e., Opposite Party No.2
did not choose to participate in the hearing of this revision in spite of
receiving notice for the same through the learned Additional Standing
Counsel for the State(Opposite Party).
7. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the
petitioner(CICL) submitted that, the CICL is prosecuting his study, for
which, his prayer for bail should not have been refused by the Juvenile
Justice Board, Nayagarh as well as by the learned appellate court, to
which, learned Additional Standing Counsel objected contending in
support of the reasons assigned above by the Juvenile Justice Board as
well as by the learned appellate court for the refusal of bail of the
CICL(petitioner).
As per the provisions of law envisaged in the proviso of Sub-
section(1) to Section 12 of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, the CICL can be
denied with the privilege of bail, only if, the court is of the opinion that,
(i) there appears reasonable grounds for believing that,
the release of CICL on bail shall bring him into
association with any known criminal or
(ii) shall expose him to moral, physical or
psychological danger or that his such release would
defeat the ends of justice.
8. The necessary essentials indicated above in (i) and (ii) of the
proviso of Sub-section(1) to Section 12 of J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 must be
there in the record to make out any of the above grounds out of two,
which may persuade the court not to release the CICL on bail.
9. As per The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, the nature and gravity of the
matter has no significance for the consideration of bail of the CICL. So,
the CICL has to be released on bail irrespective of the nature and gravity
of the matter.
The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 is a beneficial legislation, which has been
enacted to reform the child.
As per Section 3(i) and (iv) of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, all
decisions regarding the child shall be passed for the "best interest" of the
child(CICL) presuming the CICL "to be an innocent."
Therefore, in all orders pertaining to a CICL has to be a
reformative approach for no other reason, but, only for promoting the
well-being of the CICL.
10. As per the mandate of the provisions of Section 12 of the
J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, a CICL has to be released on bail, irrespective of
the nature and gravity of the matter, because, bail for the CICL is the rule
and refusal is an exception.
The right of privilege of bail of the CICL can be denied, only
assigning clear and valid reasons regarding the applicability of the
proviso to Section-12 of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, otherwise not.
11. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified
by the Hon‟ble Courts and The Apex Court in the ratio of the following
decisions :-
(i) Suo Motu Writ Petition(Civil) No.04 of 2020(S.C.)
The JJBS and Children‟s Court shall consider in taking
steps to release all children on bail, unless there are
clear and valid reasons for the application of the proviso
to Section 12 J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 for the refusal of
their bails.
(ii) 2016(4) Crime-188(Allahabad): Amit Yadav Alias
Monu Alias Bebo vrs. State of U.P. and Anr.--
J.J.(C&P) Act, 2000--Section 12--Bail--If there
are no imminent chances of his repeating the matter,
bail to a juvenile should not be ordinarily refused.
(iii) 2009 Cr.L.J. : A Juvenile vrs. State of Orissa
2002(Orissa)
"A Juvenile needs parental protection and guidance to
bring him back to the main-stream of the society from
which he has strayed. Thus, his release on bail would
aid the ends of justice rather than defeat it."
(iv) 2023(1) Crimes-406(Jharkhand) : Shahnawaz
Hussain vrs. The State of Jharkhand-- J.J.(C&P)
Act, 2015-- Section 12--Bail--When the CICL has no
criminal history and the possibility of the CICL in
coming with association of any known criminal is very
remote, then the CICL is to be granted on bail.
12. It is the mandate of Section 3 (viii) of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 in
administration of that Act that,
"The Central Government, The State Governments, the
Board, and other agencies, as the case may be, while
implementing the provisions of this Act, shall be guided by the
following fundamental principles, namely:-
(i) xx xx xx xx
(ii) xx xx xx xx
(iii) xx xx xx xx
(iv) xx xx xx xx
vi) xx xx xx xx
(vi) xx xx xx xx
(vii) xx xx xx xx
(viii) Principle of non-stigmatizing semantics-Adversarial or
accusatory words are not to be used in the processes pertaining to
a child.
(ix) xx xx xx xx "
xx xx xx xx
13. In this revision at hand, the impugned orders passed by the
Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh and the learned appellate court
pertaining to the CICL(petitioner), those are under challenge in this
revision are not free from the use of accusatory words pertaining to the
CICL(petitioner), for which, the said orders are not in proper
administration of the Act, i.e., The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015.
On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified
by the Hon‟ble Courts in the ratio of the following decision:-
2021(2) Crimes 107(Patna) : Sumit Kumar vrs. State of
Bihar--Any order relating to a juvenile passed by any
court shall have no effect in eyes of law, if the same be
passed in non-conformity with provisions of J.J.(C&P)
Act, 2015.(Para-11)
14. When, the learned Appellate Court has refused the prayer for bail
of the CICL(petitioner) on the basis of the opinions given in the social
investigation report and when such opinions in the social investigation
report are not supported by any substantive materials, then at this
juncture, in view of the propositions of law enunciated in the ratio of the
above decisions coupled with the mandate of Section 3(viii) of The
J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, it is held that, the impugned orders passed by the
Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh on dated 16.08.2024 and the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children‟s Court, Nayagarh on
03.09.2024 in Criminal Appeal No.17/39 of 2024 for the refusal of bail
of the CICL(Petitioner) only on the basis of presumptions,
surmises/inferences and guess works cannot be sustainable under law for
the following reasons, i.e.,:-
(i) the impugned orders have been passed using accusatory words
pertaining to CICL in contravention with Section 3(viii) of The
J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015.
(ii) the social investigation report does not reveal that, the CICL was
subjected to any form of abuse or was a victim of any similar
situation earlier or was mixed with any bad associate earlier.
(iii) the social investigation report does not reveal about any
immediate chance in repeating the similar circumstance by the
CICL.
(iv) the social investigation report does not reveal about any
possibility or chance of fleeing away from the process of justice,
in case of release of the CICL on bail.
(v) nothing appears from the social investigation report about any
bad record of the father of CICL, rather the father-guardian of
the CICL has sworn through an affidavit that, he shall take
proper care of the CICL being his natural father guardian after
release of the CICL on bail.
So, for the reasons assigned above, there is justification under law,
for making interference with the impugned orders through this revision
filed by the CICL(petitioner).
Therefore, there is merit in this revision of the petitioner (CICL).
The same must succeed.
15. In result, the revision filed by the CICL(petitioner) is allowed on
merit.
The impugned orders dated 16.08.2024 and 03.09.2024,
respectively passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh in JUV Case
No.26 of 2024 as well as by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-
Children‟s Court, Nayagarh in Criminal Appeal No.17/39 of 2024 are set
aside.
16. The prayer for bail of the CICL(petitioner) in JUV Case No.26 of
2024 is allowed.
17. The Juvenile Justice Board, Nayaragh is directed to release the
CICL(petitioner) on bail in JUV Case No.26 of 2024 with required bail
bond or bail bonds imposing lawful conditions as it deems fit and proper
with a compulsory condition that:-
The natural father-guardian of the CICL shall furnish an
undertaking that, he will take care of his
son(CICL/Petitioner) and he will not allow him(CICL)
to mix with any bad associate.
18. Accordingly, this criminal revision is disposed of finally.
Registry is directed to transmit the copies of this judgment to the
appellate court in reference to Criminal Appeal No.17/39 of 2024 as well
as Juvenile Justice Board, Nayagarh in reference to JUV Case No.26 of
2024 forthwith for information and lawful actions/compliances on the
basis of this judgment.
( A.C. Behera )
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 20th of November, 2024/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
Designation: Personal Assistant
