AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Criminal Revision Application is directed against
the order dated 06.04.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
Begusarai in Cr. Appeal No. 31 of 2017 whereby the learned
Sessions Judge refused to grant bail to the petitioner, a juvenile and
refused to set aside the order dated 01.03.2017 passed in J.J.B. Case
No. 01 of 2017 whereby the learned Juvenile Justice Board has also
refused to grant bail to the petitioner. The aforesaid J.J.B. Case arises
out of Barauni Rail P.S. Case No. 123 of 2016 registered under
Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 as well
as Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code, as the petitioner
was found carrying foreign liquor.
Submission of the petitioner is that the petitioner raised
the issue that on the date of occurrence, he was a juvenile and
accordingly, his matter was referred to Juvenile Justice Board,
Begusarai. By the order dated 31.01.2017, the petitioner was
declared as a juvenile after enquiry and, thereafter, prayer for bail
was refused by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, firstly, on the
ground that the witnesses have supported the allegation against the
petitioner before the police and, secondly, for the reason that now-a-
days veteran criminals are using the juvenile to achieve their criminal
goals. Moreover, there are chances of the petitioner mixing with
more criminals and there is apprehension of his moral, physical or
psychological exploitation.
Learned Sessions Judge while exercising the power of
appeal under Section 52 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection
of Children) Act, 2000, has also refused the prayer for bail of the
petitioner stating that proviso to Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act empowers not to grant bail if release
of the juvenile is likely to bring him into association with any known
criminal or expose the juvenile to moral, physical or psychological
danger. Learned Sessions Judge has not discussed the material for
such satisfaction or the name of the known criminal in whose
association the petitioner is likely to go in the event of his release.
Submission of the petitioner is that the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act is there with an object to
protect the children and the proviso to Section 12 of the Act should
not have been used as a sword to refuse the bail only on the ground
that in the event of release, the petitioner would go into association
with any known criminal or there is chances of his exploitation.
Leanred counsel for the State opposed the prayer for
bail on the ground that the reasons assigned by both the court below
are based on the provisions of law permitting them to refuse to grant
bail if the case comes under proviso of that Section.
In my view, there is no material to substantiate that in
the event of release, the petitioner would go into association with any
known criminal. Moreover, to avoid any suspicion of his moral,
physical or psychological exploitation, the court below could have
put such condition which would have been appropriate in the facts
and circumstances of the case. However, the mandate of law that
grant of bail to the juvenile is rule, should not have been violated, in
the casual manner.
Considering the facts and circumstances, let the
petitioner, above named, be released on bail on execution of surety
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) by one of his parents to take
proper care of the juvenile and shall not allow the juvenile to mingle
with criminals and shall produce him as and when required during enquiry before the Leanred Juvenile Justice Board, Begusarai, to the
satisfaction of the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Begusarai, in
connection with J.J.B. Case No. 01 of 2017 arising out of Barauni
Rail P.S. Case No. 123 of 2016.
With the aforesaid observation, this Criminal Revision
Application stands allowed.