Allowed

Miraj Ansari @ Kittu v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC16 Jan 2013CR. REV./13/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal revision and set aside the Sessions Judge's order rejecting bail for a juvenile. The Court held that rejecting bail without probable evidence regarding the risk of reassociation violated Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside. Juvenile released on bail of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, one being a parent.

Miraj Ansari @ Kittu Vs The State Of Bihar — Child Custody and Guardianship | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.13 of 2013

¶2

===================================================== Miraj Ansari @ Kittu, son of Mushtaque Ahmad, resident of villageDayalpur, P.S. Janta Bazar, District-Saran at Chapra through Mushtaque Ahmad, son of Suleman Ansari (father), village-Dayalpur, P.S. Janta Bazar, District-Saran at Chapra.

¶3

.... .... Petitioner. Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite party. ===================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER -----------

¶4

2 16-01-2013 Heard the parties.

¶5

This Criminal Revision is directed against the order dated 10.10.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, in Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No.95 of 2012, whereby the Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, dismissed the aforesaid Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 25.7.2012 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Saran (Chapra), in Juvenile Enquiry Case No.248 of 2012 (J. Tr. No.705 of 2012), arising out of Janta Bazar P.S. Case No.51 of 2012 registered under Sections 395, 364(A) and 302/201 of the Indian penal Code, rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶6

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has been disclosed by the co-accused. Except that there is nothing

¶7

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.13 of 2013 (2) dt.16-01-2013

¶8

2 / 4

¶9

against the petitioner to show his involvement in the alleged offence. It has also been submitted that the Juvenile Justice Board, Saran (Chapra), rejected the prayer of the petitioner for bail vide order dated 25.7.2012 in Juvenile Enquiry Case No.248 of 2012 (J. Tr. No.705 of 2012), arising out of Janta Bazar P.S. Case No.51 of 2012, arriving at the conclusion that in case the petitioner is released on bail, he would mix up with the group with whom he is alleged to have committed the offence and that would put the juvenile in socio physical and psychological danger and the Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, also dismissed the Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No.95 of 2012, preferred by the petitioner against the aforesaid order of the Juvenile Justice Board, Saran (Chapra), through the impugned order dated 10.10.2012.

¶10

On perusal of the impugned order dated 10.10.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra in Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No.95 of 2012, it appears that the Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, dismissed the Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No.95 of 2012 preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 25.7.2012 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Saran (Chapra), in Juvenile Enquiry Case No.248 of 2012 (J. Tr. No.705 of 2012), arising out of Janta Bazar P.S. Case No.51 of 2012, rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner, arriving at the conclusion that

¶11

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.13 of 2013 (2) dt.16-01-2013

¶12

3 / 4

¶13

there is likelihood of going the petitioner in the association of the co-accused persons or other harden criminals which will expose him to moral, physical and psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice.

¶14

On bare reading of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, it appears that a juvenile in conflict with law shall be released on bail unless there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. The aforesaid ground must be reasonably supported by the documents/evidence and not merely on guess. As such, the refusal of the prayer of the petitioner for bail would be unjustified and against the provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

¶15

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Criminal Revision is allowed and the impugned order dated 10.10.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, in Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No.95 of 2012, is set aside. The petitioner abovenamed is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

¶16

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.13 of 2013 (2) dt.16-01-2013

¶17

4 / 4

¶18

Juvenile Justice Board, Saran at Chapra, in connection with Juvenile Enquiry No.248 of 2012 (Juvenile Trial No.705 of 2012), arising out of Janta Bazar P.S. Case No.51 of 2012. Out of the two sureties, one surety must be parent, who will also file an affidavit by way of undertaking to the effect that he/she will take care of the petitioner so that he may not indulge in association of unsocial elements.

¶19

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

¶20

P.S./-

Miraj Ansari @ Kittu v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Miraj Ansari @ Kittu v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neeraj Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Rajnish Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

The State of Bihar Vs Muneshwar Kumar and Anr.

Sumit Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.

Sudhir Singh Vs The State Of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Vs State of Bihar and Anr.