Division Bench has given great emphasis upon the very object of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 specially Section 12 thereof. It is ruled that while interpreting Section 12, the Board is duty bound to be guided by the fundamental principles enumerated in Section 3, specially the principles of ‘best interest’, ‘repatriation’ and ‘restoration’ of child which provides that a child shall be placed in institutional care as a step of last resort, after making a reasonable enquiry. In all cases the Board is required to record its reasons, if it refuses to child on bail and the circumstances that led to such a decision. It is made clear that seriousness of the offence alleged cannot be made a ground for rejecting bail in case of a child in conflict with law. The learned Division Bench further ruled that ‘in the juvenile justice legal system, Parens Patriae Doctrine allows the State to step in and serve as a guardian for children, the mentally ill, the incompetent, the elderly or the disabled persons who are unable to care for themselves. Normally the natural parents and family are expected to take care of their children, but when they fail the State steps into shoes of the parents and family to provide the same care and protection as their own parents and family should have provided for them. A child in conflict with law should be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child sense of dignity
