Jagat Singh vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner (juvenile- through his natural guardian Uncle (Sukhvir Singh S/o Preetam Singh) as well as learned Public

Prosecutor.

The allegation against the petitioner is of offences under Sections 307, 323, 341, 504 of IPC. The bail application filed by the petitioner under Section

12 of the Act of 2015 before learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Sriganganagar was rejected vide order dated 29.01.2021. Being

aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner before the learned Child Court (Sessions Judge), Sriganganagar and the same has

been dismissed vide impugned order dated 02.02.2021.

Being aggrieved of the orders dated 29.01.2021 and 02.02.2021 passed by the learned courts below, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition

before this Court.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the interim bail granted by the Court, the petitioner has surrendered.

Further submissions have been made that challan has already been filed and co-accused Harjeet Kour has been granted bail on 08.04.2021 by a

Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.4122/2021. The applicant is in custody since 25.01.2021 and that the report

from the probation officer has already been received and, therefore, the petitioner being juvenile may be enlarged on bail.

Further submissions have been made the petitioner is below 18 years of age and there is no evidence to show that if the juvenile-petitioner is released

on bail, then his release is likely to bring them 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. It is argued that learned courts below have not appreciated the fact that the petitioner is juvenile and

entitled to get benefit of provisions of the Act of 2015.

Section 12 of the Act of 2015 clearly provides that if the accused is juvenile, then he should be released on bail, but learned Courts below totally

ignored the provisions of the Act of 2015. The petitioner is in custody since long and no further detention of the petitioner is required for any purpose.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the gravity of the offence committed cannot be a ground to decline bail to a juvenile.

On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor defended the impugned order passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board in declining the bail to the

petitioner as also the judgment passed by the Appellate Court upholding the order passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board.

Learned counsel for the complainant also opposed the petition.

I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the provisions of the Act of 2015.

The language of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 conveys the intention of the Legislature to grant bail to the juvenile, irrespective of nature or gravity of

the offence, alleged to have been committed by him and bail can be denied only in the case where there appears 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 ends of justice.

In this context, I have also scanned through and perused the orders passed by the courts below as well as the report of the probation officer.

Having carefully examined provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act vis-a-vis the orders passed by the courts below, I do not find that any of the

exceptional circumstances, to decline bail to a juvenile, as indicated in Section 12 of the Act of 2015, is made out.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, this revision petition is allowed and the order dated 29.01.2021 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile

Justice Board, Sriganganagar, rejecting bail application of the petitioner, as well as order dated 02.02.2021 passed by learned Child Court (Sessions

Judge), Sriganganagar, rejecting the appeal, are hereby set aside.

It is ordered that the juvenile accused-petitioner Jagat Singh S/o Sh. Onkar Singh @ Kara Singh (juvenile) - through his natural guardian Uncle

(Sukhvir Singh S/o Preetam Singh), shall be released on bail in relation to FIR No.259/2020 Police Station Ramsinghpur, Sriganganagar, upon

furnishing a personal bond by his natural guardian Uncle (Sukhvir Singh S/o Preetam Singh) in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with a surety in the like

amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court; with the stipulation that on all subsequent dates of hearing, he shall appear before the said court or any

other court, during pendency of the investigation/trial in the case and that his guardian shall keep proper look after of the delinquent child and secure

them away from the company of known criminals.