Revision petition against rejection of bail application filed by a juvenile accused was dismissed. The court held release would expose the child to danger and defeat ends of justice.
None granted; petition dismissed due to risk to juvenile from bail and potential defeat of ends of justice.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1270/2021
Sunil Kumar S/o Kalla, Aged About 14 Years, R/o Village Sahroli, Police Station Saipau, District Dholpur (Raj.) Through Natural Guardian Father Kalla S/o Shiv Singh R/o Village Sahroli, Police Station Saipau, District Dholpur (Raj.) (At Present Detained In The Child Reform Centre, Dholpur)
----Accused-Petitioner
Versus
----Respondent
----Complainant-Non-Petitioner
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Yogesh Singhal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ganesh Saini, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR VYAS
Order
06/12/2021
Petitioner through his natural guardian (father) has filed this revision petition under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) against the order dated 29.09.2021 passed by the Court of Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act & Protection of Child Right Commission Act, Dholpur in Criminal Appeal No.17/2021, affirming the order dated 22.09.2021 passed by the Court of Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Dholpur, whereby the application of the accused-
(2 of 3)
[CRLR-1270/2021]
petitioner seeking his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act, was dismissed.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He is below fourteen years of age. Report of the Probation Officer under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act(hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) has been received, which is not adverse to the petitioner. Under Section 12 of the Act, the gravity of offence is not a relevant factor for grant of bail to the petitioner. There is no evidence on record to connect the petitioner with the crime. He is in judicial custody since 08.09.2021. Conclusion of inquiry may take long time. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner may be given benefit of bail.
Learned counsel has placed reliance on following judgments :-
Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition and has submitted that age of the victim is four years and the medical report also supports the prosecution version.
It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed for offence under Sections 342, 363, 376(AB), 376(2)(j) of IPC and Section 3(B)/4, 5(I)/6 of the POCSO Act. Report of the Probation Officer also clearly states that the cause of offence was wrong company and lack of moral and social education of the
(3 of 3)
[CRLR-1270/2021]
juvenile in conflict with law. Hence, it is prayed that the petition may be dismissed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record as well as Report of the Probation Officer under Section 12 of the Act.
Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, evidence available on record and age of the victim (four years), if the petitioner/juvenile is released on bail, there are reasonable grounds to believe that his release is likely to bring him into association with known criminal, expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger and would defeat the ends of justice, therefore, no ground is made out to allow the revision petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Dismissed.
(MANOJ KUMAR VYAS),J
Hemant/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to a juvenile accused despite the gravity of the offence when release poses risk to ends of justice
Whether Probation Officer report under Section 12 is favourable to the juvenile petitioner
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sorabh v. State of RajasthanReferred¶20
Sorabh v. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.1108/2020, decided on 23.10.2020)
Sachin v. State of Rajasthan and anr.Referred¶21
Sachin v. State of Rajasthan and anr. (S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.618/2020, decided on 03.11.2020)
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sunil Kumar S/o Kalla
State Of Rajasthan
Manoj Kumar Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
