Amit Alias Mohit vs State Of Haryana
2023 Latest Caselaw 467 P&H

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH
214
                                      *****

CRR No. 383 of 2022 Date of Decision : 11.1.2023

Amit alias Mohit ..... Petitioner

versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

Present: Mr. Manoj Kumar Pundir, Advocate, for the petitioner

Ms. Ankita Ahuja, AAG, Haryana

---

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA J. (ORAL):

1. This is a revision petition challenging the order dated 27.5.2020

passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Karnal, and the

order dated 24.6.2020 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal,

whereby the petitioner/juvenile in conflict with law was declined bail in case

FIR No.67 dated 1.5.2020 under Sections 323 and 452 IPC and Section 4 of

POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Nighdu, District Karnal.

2. The petitioner undisputedly is a juvenile as he was born on

28.8.2003. Grant of bail to juveniles is governed by provisions of Section 12 of

the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which reads as

under:

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 1[or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the

1 of 3

care of any fit institution of fit person] but he shall not be so released if there appear 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 incharge 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 the inquiry regarding him as may be specified in the order.

A reading of the provision makes it apparent that a juvenile in conflict with law

is entitled to grant of bail irrespective of the nature or gravity of the offence

alleged to have been committed by him. Bail can only be declined when there

are reasonable grounds for believing that his release is likely to bring him in

association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or

psychological danger, or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. A

reference in that regard can be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in

Re Exploitation of Children in Orphanages in the State of Tamil Nadu v. Union

of India and others (2020) 14 SCC 327.

3. A perusal of the impugned orders show that bail to the petitioner/

juvenile in conflict with law has been declined by observing that he as well as

the victim are of the same village. In case the juvenile is released on bail, there

are chances of threat to his safety. Therefore, it is in his best interests to be kept

inside safe precinct or 'place of safety' Madhuban. It is also observed that in

cases of sexual offences involving minor children, not only safety and security

of the juvenile in conflict with law is the Courts' concern, but also that of the

2 of 3

minor victim. In case the juvenile was to be released on bail, not only he would

face hostile environment in the village but the minor victim would also be

exposed to discomfort and embarrassment.

4. Therefore, relevant provisions to decline bail as contained in

Section 12 of the Act were not considered while passing the impugned orders.

There is no material on record to establish that on being released from custody

the petitioner/juvenile in conflict with law is likely to come in association with

any known criminal or will be exposed to any moral, physical or psychological

danger. It is also not the case that his release would defeat the ends of justice.

The petitioner's case, accordingly, does not fall in any of the exceptions carved

out under Section 12 of the Act for declining bail to a juvenile in conflict with

law, and he becomes entitled to grant of the same.

5. In view of the aforesaid, without going into the merits of the case,

the present revision petition is allowed. The order dated 27.5.2020 passed by

the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Karnal, as also the order dated

24.6.2020 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, are set aside, and

petitioner/juvenile in conflict with law is ordered to be released on bail subject

to furnishing of adequate bail/surety bonds by his parents/guardian to the

satisfaction of the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board/Duty Magistrate,

Karnal.

                                                        (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA)
                                                                JUDGE
11.1.2023
Ashwani
             Whether speaking/reasoned:      Yes/No
             Whether reportable:             Yes/No




                                          3 of 3