Allowed

Sonu @ Amit Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC23 Jan 2013CR. REV./37/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed the criminal revision and set aside the lower court's rejection of bail. The court held that the refusal was unjustified as it failed to provide evidence supporting the claim that bail would endanger the juvenile or defeat justice.

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment is set aside. The petitioner is enlarged on bail of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties, one being a parent who undertakes to supervise the petitioner.

Sonu @ Amit Kumar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.37 of 2013 (2) dt.23-01-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.37 of 2013

¶3

====================================================== Sonu @ Amit Kumar Singh, son of Sri Digvijay Prasad Singh, R/O VillageUnsar, P.O.- Unsar, P.S.- Bochaha, Distt.- Muzaffarpur through guardian Digvijay Prasad Singh. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 2 23-01-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶4

The petitioner has filed this criminal revision under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, against the Judgment dated 12.12.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Patna in Criminal Appeal No. 194 of 2012, whereby the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the aforesaid criminal appeal preferred by the petitioner affirming the order dated 26.11.2012 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Patna City rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for bail in connection with J.J.B. Case No. 294 of 2012 arising out of Kotwali P.S. Case No. 287 of 2002 registered under Sections 364A, 379 and 411of the Indian Penal Code.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been made accused in Kotwali (Patna ) P.S. Case No. 287 of 2002 on the basis of confessional statement of co-

¶6

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.37 of 2013 (2) dt.23-01-2013

¶7

accused except that there is nothing against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has been declared juvenile by the Juvenile Justice Board, Patna vide order dated 12.11.2012 passed in J.J.B Case No. 294 of 2012 thereafter the petitioner prayed for bail before the Juvenile Justice Board, Patna City which was rejected on 26.11.2012. Thereafter the petitioner preferred the Criminal Appeal No. 194 before the Sessions Judge, Patna which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 12.12.2012 without taking into consideration provision of Section 12 (1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 in proper aspects.

¶8

On bare perusal of provision of Section 12 (1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, it appears that 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, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of Justice. The existence of the aforesaid ground should not mean guesswork but it is supported by evidence like report of Probation Officer.

¶9

The impugned order shows that the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the criminal appeal of the petitioner through the

¶10

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.37 of 2013 (2) dt.23-01-2013

¶11

impugned order arriving at conclusion that release of the petitioners on bail would defeat the ends of justice and bring him into association with known criminal and expose him to moral and psychological danger without assigning the proper reason. As such, the refusal of the bail of the petitioner was unjustified and against the intention of the provision of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

¶12

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this criminal revision is allowed and impugned Judgment 12.12.2012 is set aside. The petitioner above named is ordered to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Patna in connection with J.J.B. Case No. 294 of 2012 arising out of Kotwali (Patna) P.S. Case No. 287 of 2002. Subject to the condition that out of two sureties one surety must be parent who will also give an undertaking to the effect that he/she will take care to the petitioner so that petitioner may not indulge in bad association.

¶13

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J)

¶14

Bhardwaj/-

Sonu @ Amit Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu @ Amit Kumar Singh 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

Md. Ismail Vs State of Bihar and Ors.

Kedar Nath Ray Vs State of Bihar Thru.Vig.

Madhu Kumari Vs State of Bihar and Ors.

Arvind Prasad Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Chandrabhushan Mishra Vs State of Bihar and Ors.

Mridula Sharma Vs the State of Bihar and Anr.