Allowed

Shrawan Kumar v. State

Rajasthan HC19 Apr 2017CRLR/452/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Rajasthan allowed a criminal revision petition filed by a juvenile accused of theft. The court quashed orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and Sessions Judge that had rejected a bail application, holding that the lower courts erred in not adopting a liberal approach considering the petitioner's age, probation report, and academic standing.

What did the court decide?

Both impugned orders rejecting bail quashed; juvenile ordered released on bail upon furnishing Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties to the Juvenile Justice Board.

Shrawan Kumar Vs State — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Revision No. 452 / 2017

¶3

Shrawan Kumar S/o Mohanlal Ji, aged about 17 years, by caste Bishnoi, resident of Sakad, through his grand father Bhaguram S/o Shri Israram, by caste Bishnoi, resident of Sakad, Tehsil Sanchore, District Jalore

¶4

(at present Bal Sudhar Grah, Jalore)

¶5

----Petitioner Versus State ----Respondent _____________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. Dinesh Bishnoi. For Respondent-State : Mr. R.K. Bohra, PP.

¶6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA

¶7

Order

¶8

19/04/2017

¶9

Defect pointed out by the office is hereby waived.

¶10

Petitioner-juvenile Shrawan Kumar through his guardian - grandfather Bhaguram has preferred this revision petition under the provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short, ‘JJ Act) to assail impugned order dated 22^nd of March 2017 passed by Sessions Judge, Jalore (for short, ‘learned appellate Court’) confirming order dated 17^th of March 2017 passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jalore (for short, ‘learned Board’).

¶11

Succinctly stated, the facts of case are that a complaint against petitioner-juvenile for offence under Sections 379 IPC came to be registered as FIR No.54/2017 at Police Station

¶12

(2 of 4)

¶13

[CRLR-452/2017]

¶14

Raniwara, District Jalore. Thereafter, the juvenile was produced before the Board and presently he is lodged in Observation Home. At the behest of petitioner, an application under Section 12 of the JJ Act was laid before Juvenile Justice Board, Jalore seeking bail, but the same was rejected vide order dated 17^th of March 2017. Being aggrieved by the same, an appeal was preferred before Sessions Judge, Jalore but that too did not fructify to the advantage of petitioner-juvenile and the learned appellate Court rejected the appeal.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the report solicited from probation officer speaks volume about the fact that conduct of the petitioner (juvenile) is upright and satisfactory. It is also submitted that the petitioner is pursuing his studies and has passed his secondary examination with good marks. It is argued by learned counsel that looking to the age of petitioner, who is a child in conflict with law, benevolent view is desirable in the matter of grant of bail for facilitating his reformation. Lastly, learned counsel has urged that both the Courts below have not examined the afflictions of child in conflict with law in right perspective and therefore, interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction is warranted.

¶16

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the revision petition.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned orders as well as report of probation officer and other materials available on record.

¶18

(3 of 4)

¶19

[CRLR-452/2017]

¶20

JJ Act confers power upon the State to make special provision for children by invoking Article 15 of the Constitution of India. Article 39(e), (f), 45 & 47 further makes the State responsible for ensuring that all needs of children are met and their basic human rights are protected. While it is true that a child who is in conflict with law can be tried as a general accused after holding preliminary inquiry under Section 15 of the JJ Act, but then, while considering the bail plea of a juvenile, the Courts are expected to adopt a pragmatic approach rather than purely idealistic and pedantic approach. As the basic object of JJ Act is to protect human rights of children and provide them congenial atmosphere for reformation, therefore, in the matter of grant of bail, a liberal approach is the need of hour.

¶21

True it is that petitioner-juvenile is charged for offence under Section 379 IPC, but then looking to his tender age and favourable report of the probation officer coupled with the fact that he has passed secondary examination with good marks, in my considered opinion, both the Courts below have seriously erred in declining to exercise discretion in his favour for grant of bail.

¶22

Accordingly, I feel persuaded to exercise revisional jurisdiction in the matter to upset both the impugned orders passed by learned Courts below. In the backdrop of facts and circumstances of the instant case, impugned orders suffer from the vice of impropriety and, therefore, merit interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.

¶23

Resultantly, both the impugned orders are hereby quashed and set aside and the revision petition is allowed. As a

¶24

(4 of 4)

¶25

[CRLR-452/2017]

¶26

consequence thereof, petitioner-juvenile, Shrawan Kumar S/o Mohan Lal, is ordered to be released on bail provided requisite bail bond is furnished by his guardian – grandfather Bhaguram in a sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Jalore with further stipulation that he shall make sincere endeavour to present juvenile (petitioner) before the Board on each and every date of hearing and as and when he is called.

¶27

(P.K. LOHRA)J.

¶28

a.asopa/-72

Shrawan Kumar v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrawan Kumar v. State

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

State Vs Gudar Das @ Dinesh

Aziaz Khan Sindhi Vs Abrar Ahmed and Ors.

State Vs Rana Ram and Anr.

Dhanna Ram Vs State and Ors.

State Vs Naraian Lal

State Vs Naraian Lal