Allowed

Manish Kumar @ Laddu v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Jul 2023CR. REV./47/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal revision concerns an appeal by a juvenile accused of murder and gun possession against bail denial. The High Court set aside the lower court's order, holding that bail is the rule for juveniles and allowing release on bond with mother as surety upon undertaking to prevent bad company.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; impugned order of CJJMB/1st ADDL SJI/CJJMB dated 02.07.2022 set aside; petitioner released on bail with mother as surety and undertaking.

Manish Kumar @ Laddu Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.47 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2020 Thana- SHANKARPUR District- Madhepura

¶3

======================================================

¶4

MANISH KUMAR @ LADDU Son of Pramod Yadav R/V- Raybhir, P.S.Shankarpur, District- Madhepura

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Ranjan For the Respondent/s : Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam ======================================================

¶6

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA

¶7

ORAL ORDER

¶8

4 25-07-2023

¶9

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶10

Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

¶11

This appeal has been filed against the judgment and

¶12

order dated 25.11.2022 passed by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Juvenile Court, Madhepura, Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2022. By impugned order, the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Juvenile Court, Madhepura, has affirmed the order, dated 02.07.2022, passed by the J. J. Board, Shankarpur, in J. J. Board Case No. 125 of 2021, arising out of Shankarpur P. S. Case No. 152 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.

¶13

The prosecution case, as per the First Information

¶14

Report, is that, while the informant’s father had gone to Shankarpur market, the informant, along with his uncle, went to

¶15

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.47 of 2023(4) dt.25-07-2023 2/7

¶16

purchase medicine near Shankarpur market, where informant saw accused persons, including the petitioner, armed with weapons. After a while, the informant saw all accused persons fleeing away on their motorcycles after firing and when he reached the place of occurrence, he found his father dead.

¶17

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was declared juvenile by order, dated 19.05.2022, passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Shankarpur, after coming to the conclusion that the petitioner was minor at the time of alleged occurrence. He next submits that by the impugned order, the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge -cumJuvenile Court, Madhepura, has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for bail on erroneous conclusion that there is a possibility that the petitioner would fall into bad company, if released on bail and grant of bail to the petitioner may cause moral, physical and psychological danger to him. He next submits that learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge -cumJuvenile Court, Madhepura, did not consider the social investigation report in correct legal perspective and the petitioner is in custody since 30.07.2021.

¶18

Learned Counsel relies upon Section 3 (i), (iv), (v) and (xiv) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of

¶19

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.47 of 2023(4) dt.25-07-2023 3/7

¶20

Children) Act, 2015, (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), which are quoted herein below:-

¶21

“(i) Principle of presumption of innocence :- Any child shall be presumed to be an innocent of any mala fide or criminal intent up to the age of eighteen years.

¶22

(iv) Principle of best interest :- All decisions regarding the child shall be based on the primary consideration that they are in the best interest of the child and to help the child to develop full potential.

¶23

(v) Principle of family responsibility :- The primary

¶24

responsibility of care, nurture and protection of the child shall be that of the biological family or adoptive or foster parents, as the case may be.

¶25

(xiv) Principle of fresh start :- All past records of any child under the Juvenile Justice system should be erased except in special circumstances”

¶26

Learned Counsel, referring to above mentioned provisions of law, submits that as per the scheme of the Act there is presumption of innocence of a child in conflict with law and all decisions regarding the child shall be taken in

¶27

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.47 of 2023(4) dt.25-07-2023 4/7

¶28

consonance with the principle of the best interest of the child. He further submits that the principle of family responsibility and principle of fresh start have also been recognized under the Act.

¶29

Learned Counsel further relied upon Section 12 of the Act, which is quoted as follows:-

¶30

“ 12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law .- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person:

¶31

Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that

¶32

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.47 of 2023(4) dt.25-07-2023 5/7

¶33

led to such a decision.

¶34

(2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under subsection (1) by the officer - in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board.

¶35

(3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.

¶36

(4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfill the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail.”

¶37

In reference to Section 12 of the Act, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that bail to a child in conflict with law is a rule and denial is exception.

¶38

Learned Counsel, in the aforesaid background, submits that the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge -cumJuvenile Court, Madhepura, has failed to consider the scheme of the Act and has committed irregularity in arriving at the

¶39

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.47 of 2023(4) dt.25-07-2023 6/7

¶40

conclusion that the petitioner may fall into bad company, if released on bail.

¶41

Learned Counsel further submits that the mother of the petitioner is ready to take proper care of the petitioner after release on bail and shall not allow him to fall into bad company and would try to bring change in his behaviour, if required.

¶42

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that from perusal of Section 12 of the Act, it appears that bail is a matter of right to a child in conflict with law and denial is exception and in view of the fact that mother has given an undertaking to reform her child, i.e. the petitioner, this Court may consider to pass appropriate order in the best interest of the child in conflict with law.

¶43

Having regard to the submissions made by the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, I am of the considered opinion that there is possibility of reform in the petitioner and the mother of the petitioner is ready to take proper care of the petitioner after his release on bail and there is no likelihood that the petitioner will fall into association with any known criminal(s). As such, the conclusion arrived at by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Juvenile Court,

¶44

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.47 of 2023(4) dt.25-07-2023 7/7

¶45

Madhepura, that the petitioner may fall into bad company, is not sustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶46

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the order dated 03.01.2020, passed by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Juvenile Court, Madhepura, in Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2022, is hereby set aside.

¶47

Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J. J. Board, Shankarpur, in J. J. Board Case No. 125 of 2021, arising out of Shankarpur P. S. Case No. 152 of 2020, subject to the following conditions:-

¶48

(i) that one of the bailors shall be the mother of the petitioner;

¶49

(ii) that the mother of the petitioner shall file an affidavit before the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Shankarpur, giving specific undertaking that after release of the petitioner on bail, she will take proper care of the petitioner and will not allow him to fall into bad company.

¶50

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶51

ashwani/-

Manish Kumar @ Laddu v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar @ Laddu 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

Sandy Yadav @ Sandeep @ Sandeep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Fuldhar Mandal Vs The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.

Rajesh Chandra Vs The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Home Deptt. Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

Gopi Raman Mishra Vs the State of Bihar, through the Secretary, Department of Home, Govt. of Bihar, Patna

Sunil Kumar Varnwal Vs the State of Bihar through the Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna

Om Prakash Singh @ Munna Singh Vs the State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Home Deptt., Govt. of Bihar, Patna