Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
S (Someshwar) vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 July, 2021
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 478/2021
X S/o Punji Lal Ahari, Aged About 17 Years, Through Natural
Guardian Mother Smt. Tusli W/o Punji Lal R/o Kheda Taplara
Thana Sadar District Dungarpur. (At Present In Child Observation
Home Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Lalit Kumar Meena S/o Chatra Meena, Jambuda Phala
Manat Semari Udaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Ojha
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment
08/07/2021
The petitioner child 'X' son of Mr. Punji Lal Ahari in
conflict with law (identity of the child has been protected in view
of the direction given by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of
Shilpa Mittal vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. reported in
AIR 2020 SC 405) has been confined in connection with FIR
No.157/2019 registered at Police Station Semari, District Udaipur
for the offences under Sections 143, 460, 302 IPC and Sections
7/8 and 11/12 of POCSO Act and is lodged at the Observation
Home, Juvenile Justice Board, Udaipur. The bail application
preferred on his behalf by his natural guardian mother Smt. Tulsi
under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act stands rejected by the
Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Udaipur by order
(2 of 3) [CRLR-478/2021]
dated 28.05.2021. The appeal preferred against the said order
under Section 101 of the Juvenile Justice Act also stands rejected
by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases No.1, Udaipur by
order dated 02.06.2021. These two orders are assailed by the
petitioner through his natural guardian in this revision preferred
under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C. read with Section 401 CrPC and
Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
I have heard and considered the submissions advanced
by learned counsel representing the parties and have gone
through the impugned orders.
Learned counsel Shri Ojha drew the Court's attention
to the statement of the first informant Lalit Meena (PW.1) who has
alleged that fatal stab below to his father Chatra was inflicted by
Naveen. So far as the petitioner-child in conflict with law is
concerned, it was alleged that he was holding the hands of the
deceased at that time. However, in cross-examination, he
admitted that in the FIR, it was not mentioned that the petitioner-
child in conflict with law caught hold of the deceased when Naveen
inflicted the stab blow.
As per the material available on record, the petitioner does
not have any criminal antecedents. He has been detained in this
case for a period in excess of one and half years. In this
background, I am of the opinion that the conditions of Section 12
of the Juvenile Justice Act are duly satisfied. Needless to say that
it is the legal obligation of the child's natural guardians to ensure
(3 of 3) [CRLR-478/2021]
that he does not come in contact with known/unknown criminals
during the pendency the inquiry.
In this background, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is
entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the inquiry
before the Juvenile Justice Board.
Consequently, the instant revision is allowed. The impugned
order dated 02.06.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO
Act Cases, No.1, Udaipur and the order dated 28.05.2021 passed
by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Udaipur
are set aside. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner 'X' S/o Mr.
Punji Lal arrested in connection with FIR No.157/2019 registered
at Police Station Semari, District Udaipur shall be released on bail;
provided his natural guardian Smt. Tulsi W/o Shri Punji Lal
furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of
Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned court below
with the stipulation to appear before the Board on all dates of
hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
(SANDEEP MEHTA),J
136-Sudhir Asopa/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
