Allowed

Ghasi Harijan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Dec 2024CRLREV/156/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision allowed Child in Conflict with Law to challenge bail rejection by Juvenile Justice Board and Children's Court. The High Court set aside original orders lacking statutory grounds and accused language, directing release on bail.

What did the court decide?

The bail prayer of petitioners is allowed; original orders dated 05.02.2024 and 23.03.2024 are set aside; Juvenile Justice Board directed to release petitioners on bail with guardians undertaking.

Ghasi Harijan Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLREV No.156 of 2024

¶3

(In the matter of a revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015)

¶4

CICL(Child in Conflict with Law) …. Petitioners and another -versus…. State of Odisha Opposite Party Appeared in this case:- For Petitioners : Mr. S.K. Rout, Advocate For Opposite Party : Mr. T.K. Acharya, Learned Additional Standing Counsel Victim/Informant is present through Video conference mode

¶5

Appeared in this case:-

¶6

CORAM: JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA

¶7

JUDGMENT

¶8

Date of hearing : 07.12.2024 / date of judgment : 11.12.2024

¶9

A.C. Behera, J. This revision has been filed under Section 102 of The Juvenile

¶10

Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short the „J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015‟) by the CICLs being the petitioners challenging

¶11

the dismissal order of the Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2024 passed on

¶12

Page 1 of 10

¶13

dated 23.03.2024 by the learned Children‟s Court-cum-Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore confirming the order of rejection of bail of the CICLs (petitioners in this revision) passed on dated 05.02.2024 by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore in J.C. No.01 of 2024 arising out of Borigumma P.S. Case No.197 of 2023.

¶14

The factual backgrounds of this revision under Section 102 of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, which prompted the CICLs (petitioners) for filing of the same is that, the petitioners (CICLs) were brought before the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore stating about their involvements in the situations on dated 30.12.2023 with the deceased, but, the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore sent them(CICLs) to the observation Home after rejecting their prayer for bail on dated 05.02.2024 assigning the reasons on the basis or social investigation report that, “due to peer group influence, parental neglect and poor financial condition, the CICLs got involved in the situations with the deceased, for which, counseling with vocational training and education is required for their best interest, for which, they (CICLs) are not deserved to be released on bail.”

¶15

So, they (CICLs) challenged the said order of rejection of their bail passed on 05.02.2024 by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore in J.C. No.01 of 2024 preferring an appeal under Section 101 of the J.J.

¶16

Page 2 of 10

¶17

(C&P) Act, 2015 before the learned Children‟s Court-cum-Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore being the appellants vide Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2024.

¶18

The learned appellate court dismissed that Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2024 of the CICLs on dated 23.03.2024 confirming the order of rejection of their bail passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore accepting the reasons assigned above by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore.

¶19

So, the CICLs filed this revision under Section 102 of the J.J. (C&P) Act, 2015 being the petitioners challenging the above dismissal order dated 23.03.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2024 by the learned Children‟s Court-cum-Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore.

¶20

I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the aggrieved person through video conference.

¶21

During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners(CICLs) submitted that, the orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore in J.C. No.01 of 2024 as well as by the appellate court in Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2024 for the refusal of bail

¶22

Page 3 of 10

¶23

of the CICLs(petitioners) are not in conformity with law, for which, the

¶24

said orders are not sustainable under law, to which, the learned Standing

¶25

Counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the aggrieved person objected supporting the reasons assigned above by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore as well as by the learned appellate court for the refusal of bail of the CICLs(petitioners).

¶26

As per the provisions of law envisaged in the proviso to Subsection(1) of Section 12 of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, the CICLs can be denied with the privilege of bail, only, if, the court is of the opinion that,

¶27

(i) there appears reasonable grounds for believing that, the release of the CICLs on bail shall bring him into association with any known criminal, or

¶28

(ii) shall expose them to moral, physical and psychological danger or that their such release would defeat the ends of justice.

¶29

The necessary essentials indicated above in (i) & (ii) of the proviso of Sub-section(1) to Section 12 of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 must be there

¶30

in the record to make out any of the above grounds out of two, which may persuade the court not to release the CICLs on bail.

¶31

As per The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, the nature and gravity of the situations/circumstances concerning the involvement of the CICLs into such situations/circumsances will be of no significance for consideration

¶32

Page 4 of 10

¶33

of bail of the CICLs. So, the CICLs have to be released on bail

¶34

irrespective of the nature and gravity of the situations/circumstances.

¶35

The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 is a beneficial legislation, which has been enacted to reform the child.

¶36

As per Section 3(i) and (iv) of the said Act, 2015, all decisions regarding the child shall be passed for the “best interest” of the child(CICL) in order to help the child to develop his/her full potential presuming the CICL “to be an innocent.”

¶37

Therefore, in all orders pertaining to a CICL has to be a reformative approach, for no other reason, but, only for promoting the well-being of the child(CICL).

¶38

Therefore, as per the mandate of the provisions of Section 12 of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, CICL has to be released on bail, irrespective of the nature and gravity of the situation/circumstance, because, bail for the CICL is the rule and refusal is an exception. The right of privilege of bail of the CICL can be denied, only assigning clear and valid reasons regarding the applicability of the proviso to Section-12 of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, otherwise not.

¶39

Page 5 of 10

¶40

On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified

¶41

by the Hon‟ble Courts and the Apex Court in the ratio of the following

¶42

decisions :-

¶43

(i) 2020(2) OJR-73(S.C.) : Exploitation of Children in Orphanages in the State of Tamil Nadu vrs. Union of India and others — J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015— Sections 10 & 12—Bail— The only embargo created for bail of the CICL is that, (i) in case the release of the child likely bring into association with known criminals or (ii) expose the child to moral, physical or psychological danger or where the release of the child would defeat the ends of justice.

¶44

(ii) Suo Motu Writ Petition(Civil) No.04 of 2020(S.C.)

¶45

The JJBS and Children‟s Court shall consider in taking steps to release all children on bail, unless there are clear and valid reasons for the application of the proviso to Section 12 JJ(C&P) Act, 2015 for the refusal of their bails.

¶46

(iii) 2011(4) Crimes-204(Jharkhand) : Manish Kumar vrs. The State of Jharkhand—J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015— Section 12—Bail— Bail to Juvenile is rule and refusal is an exception.

¶47

When the case of the CICL does not come within proviso to Section 12, then the CICL is deserved for bail.

¶48

(iv) 2009 Cr.L.J. : A Juvenile vrs. State of Orissa 2002(Orissa)

¶49

“A Juvenile needs parental protection and guidance to bring him back to the main-stream of the society from which he has strayed. Thus, his release on bail would aid the ends of justice rather than defeat it.”

¶50

(v) 2016(4) Crimes-188(Allahabad): Amit Yadav Alias Monu Alias Bebo vrs. State of U.P. and Anr.— J.J.(C&P) Act, 2000—Section 12—Bail— If there are no imminent chances of his repeating the matter, bail to a juvenile should not be ordinarily refused.

¶51

Page 6 of 10

¶52

(vi) CRR 53 of 2021(O&M) (P&H) : Vishvas vrs. State of Punjab (dated on 08.02.2021) Para-16—J.J. (C&P) Act, 2015—Section 12—Bail— The social investigation would enable the Board to come to a conclusion as to whether there are any grounds of denying bail as per the proviso to Section 12(1) of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the J.J. Board to take into consideration the social investigation report and make an objective assessment of the reasonable grounds for rejecting the bail application of the juvenile. Because, the social investigation report is to identify and understand the circumstances of the child in question, what may have led to the alleged incident.

¶53

(vii) 2024(4) Crimes-264(Uttarakhand) : X vrs. State of Uttarakahand — J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015—Section—12— All decisions regarding child shall be based on primary consideration that they are in best interest of child and to help child to develop full potential.

¶54

It is the mandate of Section 3 (viii) of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 in

¶55

administration of that Act that,

¶56

“The Central Government, The State Governments, the Board, and other agencies, as the case may be, while implementing the provisions of this Act, shall be guided by the following fundamental principles, namely:-

¶57

(i)	xx	xx	xx	xx
(ii)	xx	xx	xx	xx
(iii)	xx	xx	xx	xx
(iv)	xx	xx	xx	xx
vi)	xx	xx	xx	xx
(vi)	xx	xx	xx	xx
(vii)	xx	xx	xx	xx

¶58

(viii) Principle of non-stigmatizing semantics-Adversarial or accusatory words are not to be used in the processes pertaining to a child.

¶59

(ix) xx xx xx xx ” xx xx xx xx

¶60

Page 7 of 10

¶61

In this revision at hand, the impugned orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore as well as by the learned appellate court pertaining to the CICLs(petitioners), those are under challenge in this revision are not free from the use of accusatory words, for which, the said orders are not in proper administration of the Act, i.e., The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015.

¶62

On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified by the Hon‟ble Courts in the ratio of the following decision:-

¶63

2021(2) Crimes 107(Patna) : Sumit Kumar vrs. State of Bihar— Any order relating to a juvenile passed by any court shall have no effect in eyes of law, if the same be passed in non-conformity with provisions of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.(Para-11)

¶64

When, neither the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore nor

¶65

the learned appellate court has stated in their respective rejection order of bail of the CICLs about the chance or possibility of exposure of CICLs to moral, physical or psychological danger in case of their release on bail or their release on bail shall bring them into association with their any bad associate or they(CICLs) were subjected to any form of abuse or they were victim of any similar situation earlier or there are imminent chances in repeating the similar situation/circumstance by them(CICLs) in case of their release on bail or there is any possibility or chance of their fleeing away from the process of justice after their release on bail, then at this

¶66

Page 8 of 10

¶67

juncture, it is held that, the reasons assigned by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore in J.C. No.01 of 2024 as well as by the learned Children‟s Court-cum-Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore in Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2024 for the refusal for bail of the CICLs are not sustainable under law.

¶68

So, for the reasons assigned above, there is justification under law, for making interference with the impugned orders through this revision filed by the CICLs(petitioners).

¶69

As such, there is merit in the revision filed by the petitioners (CICL). The same must succeed.

¶70

In result, the revision filed by the CICLs(petitioners) is allowed on merit.

¶71

The impugned orders dated 05.02.2024 and 23.03.2024, respectively passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore in J.C. No.01 of 2024 as well as by the learned Children‟s Court-cum-Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore in Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2024 are set aside.

¶72

The prayer for bail of the CICLs(petitioners) in J.C. No.01 of 2024 is allowed.

¶73

Page 9 of 10

¶74

The Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore is directed to release the CICLs(petitioners) on bail in J.C. No.01 of 2024 with required bail bond or bail bonds imposing lawful conditions as it deems fit and proper with a compulsory condition that:-

¶75

The natural father-guardians of the respective CICLs shall furnish separate undertakings that, they will not allow the respective CICLs to mix with their any bad associate and shall not allow the respective CICLs to be involved with any similar situation/circumstance.

¶76

Accordingly, the criminal revision is disposed of finally.

¶77

Registry is directed to transmit the copies of this order to the appellate court in reference to Criminal Appeal No.02 of 2024 as well as Juvenile Justice Board, Koraput at Jeypore in reference to J.C. No.01 of 2024 forthwith for information and lawful actions/compliances to the

¶78

directions made in this order.

¶79

( A.C. Behera ) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 11^th of December, 2024/ Jagabandhu, P.A.

¶80

Signature Not Verified

¶81

Digitally Signed Signed by: JAGABANDHU BEHERA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK Date: 12-Dec-2024 17:46:21

¶82

Page 10 of 10

Ghasi Harijan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghasi Harijan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rati Matam Vs State of Odisha

Deepak Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Bhikari Gouda Vs State of Odisha

Ajit Barla Vs State of Odisha

Mantunu Behera Vs State of Odisha

Subash Sethy Vs State of Odisha