Juvenile Arshad vs State of Uttarakhand

This Criminal Revision has been filed by the revisionist for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 14.02.2018 passed by the

learned Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2018 and the order dated 23.01.2018

passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board. It has also been prayed that the applicant/ revisionist may be granted bail in Case Crime No. 181 of

2016, under Section 147, 148, 149, 436, 452, 504 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar.

Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that revisionist was arrested in connection with Case Crime No. 181 of 2016, under Section 147,

148, 149, 436, 452, 504 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Manglaur, District Haridwar. The revisionist moved the bail application

before the Juvenile Justice Board; but, the same was rejected vide order dated 23.01.2018. Learned counsel for the revisionist argued that the

order passed by the Juvenile Board is incorrect and is without any basis. He submitted that admittedly the revisionist is juvenile.

Section 12 (1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, provides that 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 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:

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 led to such a decision.

Thus, as per Section 12 (1) of the Act, the revisionist shall be subject to the condition mentioned in the Act. In the present case, admittedly, the

revisionist is a Juvenile. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the family members of the revisionist have no criminal history. Parents of

the revisionist are ready to keep revisionist with him and are ready to give undertaking.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds it a fit case for granting bail.

The revision is allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 14.02.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions

Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 2018, and also order dated 23.01.2018 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board is set aside.

Let revisionist Arshad be released on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each of the like amount by his natural guardian

and father to the satisfaction of Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, District Haridwar. His father shall give undertaking that the Juvenile will

remain in his custody.