Uttarakhand High Court
X vs State Of Uttarakhand on 14 November, 2022
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Revision No. 539 of 2022
X ...Revisionist
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Mani Kumar, Advocate for the revisionist.
Mr. B.P.S. Mer, Standing Counsel for the State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The challenge in this revision is made to the
following:-
(i) The judgment and order dated
28.04.2022, passed in Bail Application No.40
of 2022, "Tarsem Singh Vs. State of
Uttarakhand" by Juvenile Justice Board ("the
JJ Board"), Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar
("the case"); and
(ii) The judgment and order dated
25.07.2022, passed in Bail Appeal No.141 of
2022, X Vs. State of Uttarakhand, by the
court of Additional Sessions Judge, FTC/
Juvenile Court, Rudrapur, District Udham
Singh Nagar, by which the order passed in the
case has been confirmed.
2. The revisionist is a Child in Conflict with Law
(the CIL). According to the FIR of the case, on 12.07.2021,
two motorcycle borne persons hit the informant, due to
which his motorcycle fell down. He had a bag containing
cash. It was looted at gunpoint. According to the prosecution
case, at the instance of the CIL, a country-made pistol,
cartridges and a cash of Rs. 3 Lakhs were recovered.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
4. Learned counsel for the CIL would submit that
the CIL is innocent; his one sister is married; he has a
mother to look after; his one sister is still studying in
college; he may be released so that he can look after his
future. It is also submitted that the co-accused of the case
has also been arrested.
5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would
submit that the CIL was also involved in another case;
huge recovery was made from him.
6. The bail to a CIL is rule irrespective of the
offence being bailable or non-bailable. The only rider is the
proviso to Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Such CIL may not be
enlarged on bail if his release is likely to bring him into
association to any known criminal or expose him to moral,
physical or psychological danger or his release would
defeat the ends of justice. In the instant case, the JJ Board
has categorically recorded a finding that in case of release,
the CIL may come into association of the known criminals.
The JJ Board has recorded that, in fact, one of the co-
accused is adult. Against him, chargesheet has already
been submitted.
7. The judgment in appeal also makes reference to
the Probation Officer's report. The CIL is a drop out from
the school. He studied up to class VI. His father expired
some 7-8 years prior to lodging of this FIR. What is
interesting is that Probation Officer's report reveals that, in
fact, the CIL was also involved in one Case Crime No.337 of
2021, under Sections 392, 411 and 34 IPC of Police Station
Kiccha.
8. Today, learned counsel for the CIL would
submit that the CIL has already been granted bail in the
earlier case. The incident of Case Crime No. 337 of 2021,
Police Station Kiccha, in which the CIL is also involved, is
dated 18.10.2021. It is so revealed by the perusal of the
bail order passed in the case, which has been produced at
the time of hearing by learned counsel for the CIL. In the
instant case, the date of incident is 12.07.2021.
9. Having considered the condition of the CIL, his
family circumstances and other attending factors, this
Court is of the view that definitely if the CIL is released on
bail, it may defeat the ends of justice. Therefore, the court
below has rightly rejected the bail application of the CIL.
There is no reason to make any interference. Accordingly,
the the revision deserves to be dismissed.
10. The revision is dismissed.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
14.11.2022
Ravi Bisht
