Sunil vs State And Ors

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner (juvenile- through his natural guardian mother Smt. Santosh) as well as learned Public Prosecutor and learned

counsel for respondent No.2-complainant.

The allegation against the petitioner is of offence under Section 376AB IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act. The bail application filed by the petitioner

under Section 12 of the Act of 2015 before Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Churu was rejected vide order dated 02.12.2020. Being

aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner before the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, 2012 and Commission for Protection

of Child Right Act, 2005, Churu and the same has been dismissed by learned Appellate Court vide impugned order dated 04.12.2020.

Being aggrieved of the orders dated 02.12.2020 and 04.12.2020 passed by the Courts below, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition before

this Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is below 18 years of age and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Further there is

no evidence to show that if the juvenile-petitioner is released on bail, then his release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal, or

expose them 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 fully ignored the provisions of the Act of

2015. The petitioner is in custody since long time 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 and learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant defended the impugned order passed by the

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

Juvenile Justice Board.

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. 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 02.12.2020 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice

Board, Churu as well as order dated 04.12.2020 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, 2012 and Commission for Protection of Child Right

Act, 2005, Churu, declining bail to the petitioner are hereby set aside.

It is ordered that the juvenile accused-petitioner Sunil S/o Lt. Mahaveer Prasad, shall be released on bail in FIR No.497/2020 Police Station Sardar

Shahar, District Churu upon furnishing a personal bond by his Natural guardian, in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with a surety in the like amount to the

satisfaction of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Churu; 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 him away from the company of known criminals.