Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Shishpal Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 1 June, 2021
Bench: Manoj Kumar Judge)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 436/2021
1. Shishpal Singh S/o Shri Halsingh, Aged About 16 Years,
By Caste Rajpoot, R/o 21 Wali Aabadi, Charnwala, Police
Station Bajju, District Bikaner, Through Natural Guardian
Father Halsingh S/o Shri Bherusingh Rajpoot R/o
Charnwala, District Bikaner.
2. Samundar Singh S/o Taneraj Singh, Aged About 17 Years,
By Caste Rajpoot, R/o 21 Wali Aabadi, Charnwala, Police
Station Bajju, District Bikaner, Through Natural Guardian
Father Taneraj Singh S/o Shri Sagat Singh Rajpoot R/o
Charnwala, District Bikaner.
3. Sumar Singh S/o Shri Khuman Singh, Aged About 17
Years, By Caste Rajpoot, R/o 21 Wali Aabadi, Charnwala,
Police Station Bajju, District Bikaner, Through Natural
Guardian Father Khuman Singh S/o Shri Chain Singh
Rajpoot R/o Charnwala, District Bikaner.
(Petitioners are in custody Of Children Welfare Home
Bikaner).
----Petitioners
Versus
State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Manish Dadhich, Adv. through VC
For Respondent(s) : Ms.Anita Gehlot, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
(VACATION JUDGE)
Order
01/06/2021
Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed an application
for taking the amended cause title on record.
For the reasons mentioned in the application (IA No.1/2021),
the application is allowed. Amended cause title is taken on record.
(2 of 4) [CRLR-436/2021]
The same be placed at appropriate place of the file. The matter is
heard on merit today itself.
The allegation against the petitioners is of offence under
Sections 341, 323, 342, 365 & 506 IPC, Section 5(U)/10 of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 67 of
the IT Act. The bail application filed by the petitioners under
Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children). Act, 2015 before the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile
Justice Board, Bikaner was rejected vide order dated 19.04.2021.
Being aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed by the
petitioners before the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act Cases),
Bikaner and the same has been dismissed by learned Special
Judge vide order dated 28.04.2021.
Being aggrieved of the orders dated 19.04.2021 and
28.04.2021 passed by the Courts below, the petitioners have
preferred this revision petition before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that co-accused
Kishan Singh and Magh Singh have already been released on bail
and the case of the petitioners is similar to those of the co-
accused. It is further submitted that there is no evidence to show
that if the juvenile-petitioners are released on bail, then his
release is likely to bring him into association with any known
criminal, or expose them to moral, physical or psychological
danger, or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. It is
argued that learned Courts below have not appreciated the fact
that the petitioners are juvenile and entitled to get benefit of
provisions of the Act of 2015. Section 12 of the Act of 2015 clearly
provides that if the accused is juvenile, then he should be released
on bail, but learned Courts below fully ignored the provisions of
(3 of 4) [CRLR-436/2021]
the Act of 2015. The petitioners are in custody since long time
and no further detention of the petitioners are required for any
purpose. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted
that the gravity of the offence committed cannot be a ground to
decline bail to a juvenile.
On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor defended the
impugned order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board in declining
the bail to the petitioners as also the judgment passed by the
Appellate Court upholding the order passed by the Juvenile Justice
Board.
I have carefully considered the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties and also perused the provisions of
the Act of 2015.
The language of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 conveys the
intention of the Legislature to grant bail to the juvenile,
irrespective of nature or gravity of the offence, alleged to have
been committed by him and bail can be denied only in the case
where 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 his release would defeat ends of justice.
In this context, I have also scanned through and perused the
orders passed by the courts below.
Having carefully examined provisions of the Juvenile Justice
Act vis-a-vis the orders passed by the courts below, I do not find
that any of the exceptional circumstances, to decline bail to a
juvenile, as indicated in Section 12 of the Act of 2015, is made
out.
(4 of 4) [CRLR-436/2021]
In view of the aforesaid discussion, this revision petition is
allowed and the order dated 19.04.2021 passed by the Principal
Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Bikaner as well as order dated
28.04.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, (POCSO Act Cases),
Bikaner declining bail to the petitioners is hereby set aside.
Accordingly, it is ordered that the juvenile accused-
petitioners (1) Shishpal Singh S/o Halsingh, (2) Samundar Singh
S/o Taneraj Singh, (3) Sumar Singh S/o Khuman Singh shall be
released on bail in FIR No. 81/2021, P.S. Bajju, Distt. Bikaner
upon furnishing personal bond by their respective natural guardian
father in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each along with a surety in the
like amount to the satisfaction of learned Principal Magistrate,
Juvenile Justice Board, Bikaner with the stipulation that on all
subsequent dates of hearing, they shall appear before the said
court or any other court, during pendency of the investigation/trial
in the case and that their guardian shall keep proper look after of
the delinquent child and secure them away from the company of
known criminals.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG) VJ
81-NK/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
