Uttarakhand High Court
Sonit vs State Of Uttarakhand on 31 August, 2022
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Revision No. 36 of 2022
Sonit ...Revisionist
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the revisionist.
Mr. V.K. Jemini, D.A.G. with Ms. Meena Bisht for the
State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The challenge in this revision is made to the
judgment and order dated 01.12.2021, passed in Criminal
Appeal No.174 of 2021, Sonit Vs. State of Uttarakhand, by
the court of District and Sessions Judge, Haridwar ("the
appeal") and also for enlarging the revisionist on bail.
2. The revisionist is a Child in Conflict with Law
(the CIL). The FIR was lodged on 16.09.2021, by Pramod
Kumar. According to it, on 15.09.2021, in the evening, when
the informant was returning to his house, some miscreants,
at gun point, snatched his bag, which had some money and
mobile, etc. The bail application of the CIL was rejected by
the Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar, and this order was
upheld in the appeal.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
4. Learned counsel for the revisionist would argue
that all the co-accused, who are not child in conflict with
law, have already been enlarged on bail; there is no
evidence against the CIL except the statement of co-
accused; nothing was recovered from the CIL; he has no
criminal history; He is entitled to bail, in view of Section 12
of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2015 ("the Act").
5. Learned counsel admits that the only evidence
available against the CIL is his confession and the
confession of the co-accused. He would submit that if
released, the applicant would come in contact with the co-
accused, who are not child in conflict with law.
7. In the matters of CIL, bail is essentially a rule.
The Act does not make any distinction between bailable or
non-bailable offences. As per Section 12 of the Act, a CIL
must be released on bail irrespective of the fact as to
whether he is involved in bailable or non-bailable offence.
The only rider is given under the proviso to Section 12(1) of
the Act, according to which, if the release of the CIL may
bring him in the association of any known criminal or it
would be dangerous to his psychological development or it
may defeat the ends of justice, such CIL may not be
released on bail.
8. First and foremost, while considering such
matters, it has to be established that what is the case
against the CIL also. It is the case of the informant that his
bag was snatched by some miscreants at 9:45 in the late
evening. The miscreants are not named. Admittedly, no
recovery was made from the CIL. It is admitted case of the
prosecution also that based on the statement of the co-
accused and the confession of the CIL, he has been
arrested. It makes out a case for bail.
10. The impugned order is set aside.
11. Let the CIL be given in the custody of his father,
subject to production of two reliable sureties. The father of
the CIL shall also give an undertaking that he shall take
care of the CIL and shall not allow him to contact any of
the witnesses or their family members. The father of the
CIL shall also undertake that he shall also not contact
either the witnesses or any of any of their family members.
12. The revision is allowed, accordingly.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
31.08.2022
Ravi Bisht
