Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dinesh Sihag @ Dalip vs State Of Rajasthan on 2 March, 2021
Bench: Manoj Kumar Garg
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 831/2020
Dinesh Sihag @ Dalip S/o Lt. Sh. Om Prakash, Aged About 17
Years, R/o Raisar, P.S. Nokha, Dist. Bikaner Through Natural
Guardian Uncle Subhash Kumar S/o Sh. Anna Ram, R/o Raisar,
Tehsil And District Bikaner.
(At Present Lodged In Juvenile Home Bikaner).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Smt. Bhagwati W/o Sh. Sheraram, B/c Meghwal, R/o Near
Mohanpura Tanki, P.S. Nokha, Dist. Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.B.S.Rathore, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr.Mukhtiyar Khan, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Order
02/03/2021
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner (juvenile- through
his natural guardian Uncle Subhash Kumar) as well as learned
Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.
The allegation against the petitioner is of offence under
Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(N), 302 IPC and Section 3(2), 5(L)/6
POCSO Act. The bail application filed by the petitioner 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 03.12.2020.
Being aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed by the
petitioner before the learned Special Judge (POCSO Act Cases),
(2 of 4) [CRLR-831/2020]
Bikaner and the same has been dismissed by learned Special
Judge vide order dated 07.12.2020.
Being aggrieved of the orders dated 03.12.2020 and
07.12.2020 passed by the Courts below, the petitioner has
preferred this revision petition before this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no
evidence to show that if the juvenile-petitioner is 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 petitioner is 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 the Act of 2015. The petitioner is in custody
since long time and no further detention of the petitioner is
required for any purpose. Learned counsel for the petitioner
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 petitioner 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.
(3 of 4) [CRLR-831/2020]
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. Moreover, challan of the case has already been presented.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, this revision petition is
allowed and the order dated 03.12.2020 passed by the Principal
Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Bikaner as well as order dated
07.12.2020 passed by learned Special Judge, (POCSO Act Cases),
Bikaner declining bail to the petitioner is hereby set aside.
Accordingly, it is ordered that the juvenile accused-petitioner
Dinesh Sihag @ Dalip S/o late Om Prakash shall be released on
bail in FIR NO.29/2020, P.S. Nokha, Distt. Bikaner upon furnishing
personal bond by his natural guardian uncle Subhash Kumar S/o
Anna Ramm 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, he shall appear before the
said court or any other court, during pendency of the
(4 of 4) [CRLR-831/2020]
investigation/trial in the case and that his guardian shall keep
proper look after of the delinquent child and secure him away from
the company of known criminals.
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG),J
164-NK/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
