Sunder vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 705 Raj

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 705 Raj
Judgement Date : 13 January, 2022

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Sunder vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 January, 2022

Bench: Madan Gopal Vyas

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 16/2022

Sunder S/o Shri Shankar Lal, Aged About 18 Years, R/o Chawali, Tehsil Jayal, District Nagaur Through Natural Fatehr Shankar Lal S/o Budharam, R/o Chawali, Police Station Jayal, District Nagaur.

                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Ramesh Purohit
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Gaurav Singh, PP



         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

                                Judgment

13/01/2022

This criminal revision petition under Section 102 of the

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for

short 'the Act of 2015' hereinafter) is directed against the order

dated 8.12.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act,

2012, Merta (for short 'the appellate court' hereinafter), whereby

the appellate court has dismissed the appeal filed by the juvenile

through his natural guardian father against the order dated

20.11.2021 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile

Justice Board, Nagaur (for short 'the Board' hereinafter) on an

application under section 12 of the Act of 2015, whereby the

prayer for releasing the juvenile on bail was dismissed by the trial

court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the other co-

accused have already been enlarged on bail and the petitioner is

(2 of 3) [CRLR-16/2022]

in Observation Home since 7.4.2021. Therefore, it is prayed that

he also be released on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the cr. Revision petition

and submits that both the learned court below have rightly passed

the orders impugned.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

material available on record.

Section 12(1) of the Act of 2015, reads as under: "12. (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or 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 or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person:

Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person's release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision"

From perusal of Section 12(1) of the Act of 2015, it is clear

that a delinquent juvenile ordinarily has to be released on bail

irrespective of nature of offence alleged to have been committed

by him unless it is shown by evidence that if he is released on bail,

there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release of

the delinquent juvenile is likely to bring him into association with

any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or

(3 of 3) [CRLR-16/2022]

psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of

justice. The nature of offence and the merits of the case do not

have any relevance. It is for the prosecution to bring on record

such material while opposing the bail and make out any of the