High CourtsSingle Bench

Rajkumar@raju vs State Of Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 4 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 RAJ CK 0653

HON’BLE JUDGES
Abhay Chaturvedi, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Juvenile Justice {Care and Protection Of Children} Act, 2015 — Section 12
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision Petition No. 7 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 392 words

Petitioner through his natural guardian uncle, has preferred this revision-petition aggrieved by orders dated 24.10.2019 passed by The Special Judge,

Protection of children from sexual offences Act, 2012 and Child Rights Protection Commission Act, 2005, Sikar and order dated 27.9.2019 passed by

the Juvenile Justice Board, Sikar vide which the application filed under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice {Care and Protection of Children} Act, 2015,

was rejected.

It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the juvenile has been falsely implicated in this case. Police after investigation has filed charge-sheet

against the accused-petitioner and trial commenced in which statement of PW-1 Shankar Lal has been recorded, who has not specifically alleged that

accused-petitioner fired at him. It was also submitted that the co-accused Ajay has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.8.2019 the

case of the accused-petitioner is not distinguishable from that of the co-accused. Counsel for the petitioner submits that accused- petitioner is in

custody since 10.6.2019. The hearing of revision will take time. Probation Officer has found the conduct and behaviour of the accused-petitioner is

good and there is nothing to adverse him.

Considering the fact that Juvenile in conflict with law is to be enlarged on bail in normal circumstances and only in exceptional circumstances bail can

be rejected if the Court is of the opinion that grant of bail would bring the Juvenile in association with known criminal and it would have a negative

impact on him. Further there is no material available on record to come to the conclusion that release of juvenile would bring him in association with

criminals, this revision-petition deserves to be allowed. The impugned orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as the learned Appellate

Court are set-aside.

The present revision petition is accordingly allowed. It is directed that accused-petitioner Raj Kumar @ Raju be released on bail, provided his natural

guardian uncle, furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- alongwith two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned

Juvenile Justice Board with the stipulation that he shall produce the accused-petitioner before the concerned Juvenile Justice Board on (3 of 3)

[CRLR-7/2020] all dates, till the enquiry or trial is completed. His natural guardian uncle shall ensure that the juvenile in conflict with law maintains

good conduct and behaviour.