Sunil vs State Of Rajasthan
2021 Latest Caselaw 9606 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 404/2021

Sunil S/o Tejpal Nayak, Aged About 17 Years, R/o Arniya Panth Police Station Shambhupura, Dist. Chittorgarh, Through His Natural Guardian Father Shri Tejpal Nayak S/o Ramchandra Nayak (At Present Lodged At Kishore Grah Chittorgarh).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Smt. Radha Kanwar W/o Vinod Singh, Aged About 40 Years, B/c Rajput, R/o Arniya Panth, At Present Rental House, Near Nakoda Public School, Shambhupura, Dist. Chittorgarh.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sikandar Khan, through V.C. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mool Singh Bhati, P.P.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG

Judgment / Order

28/05/2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner (juvenile- through

his natural guardian father Shri Tejpal Nayak S/o Ramchandra

Nayak) as well as learned Public Prosecutor.

The allegation against the petitioner is for offences under

Sections 363, 366a, 376 of IPC and 3/4, 16/17 of POCSO Act. The

bail application filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of the Act

of 2015 before Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board,

Chittorgarh, rejected vide order dated 01.04.2021. Being

aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner

before the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act 2012, Chittorgarh,

(2 of 4) [CRLR-404/2021]

and the same has been dismissed by learned Appellate Court vide

impugned order dated 05.04.2021.

Being aggrieved of the orders dated 01.04.2021 and

05.04.2021 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-404/2021]

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.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this revision petition is

allowed and the order dated 01.04.2021 passed by the Principal

Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Chittorgarh, as well as order

dated 05.04.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act

2012, Chittorgarh declining bail to the petitioner is hereby set

aside.

Accordingly, it is ordered that the juvenile accused-petitioner

Sunil S/o Tejpal Nayak shall be released on bail in FIR

No.30/2021, Police Station Shambhupura, District Chittorgarh,

upon furnishing personal bond by his natural guardian father Shri

Tejpal Nayak S/o Ramchandra Nayak 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, Chittorgarh

with the stipulation that on all subsequent dates of hearing, he

(4 of 4) [CRLR-404/2021]

shall appear before the said court or any other court, during

pendency of the 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 94-Prashant/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)