Kabirdham (Kawardha) (CG). vs Respondent

Shrl Ajit Singh counsel for the applicant. Shri Sudhir Bajpai, Ddy. Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent. ORDER (Passedon 16-9-2013) 1) This Criminal Revision has been preferred by the applicant against the order dated 25-7-2013 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Kabirdham (Kawardha), in criminal appeal No. 39 of 2013, dismissing ihe appeal preferred by the applicant assailing the order dated 10-7-2013 passed the Juveniie Justice Board, Durg, in cri;~.iinal case No.32 of2013. 2) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18-4-2013 the applicant along with other co-accused abducted th? complainant forcibly for performing marriage with one of the co-aci.csed Amar Das at village Pendrikala and took her in car for which he has been convicted under Sections 366, 506, 323/34 of IPC. After concluding the investigation, charges-sheet was filed against the applicant before the Juvenile Justice Board, Durg. The applicant had filed an app'ication under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 "the Act 2000") for grant of bail before the Juvenile Justice (henceforth, Board, which was dismissed vide order dated 10-7-2013. Being aggrieved by this order, the applicant preferred an appeal before Additional Sessions Judge, Kahbirdham (Kawardha), who has also dismissed the appeal by the impugned order dated 25-7-2013. Hence, this revision. 3) Mr. Ajit Singh, learned counsel for the appli.cant submits that both the courts below have completely overlooked the provisions of Section 12 of the Act, 2000. Other five co-accused applicants including Amar Das have been acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kabirdham (FTC) on the same charges. The case of the present applicant is also similar to that of the co-accused persons who have already 'oeen acquitted by the court below. Therefore, the applicant may also be released on bail. He further submits that the Juvenile Justice Aboard rejected the application without there being any material or circumstances jus<:f;'ing conckision that release would defeat the ends ofjustice. 4) Per contra, Mr. Sudhir Bajpai, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate appearing on behalf of the State submits that while rejecting the application of the applicant, no illegality has been committed by the Juvenile Justice Board. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6) Section 12 of the Act reads as ynder:- "12. Bail of Juvenile.-(l) When any p.eroon accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of1974) or in any other law for the time being in force,,be releassd on bail with or without surety (or placed under the supervision of a Probation institution or fit person) but he Officer or under the care of any fit shall not be so released if there appear 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 wculd defeat the ends ofjustice. -^^A—-^.,^^ (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during ths pendency of the inquiry regarding him as may bespecified in the order." 7) A bare reading of Section 12 of the Act, 2000 makes it clear that any pereon accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, arrested or detained or appears or is 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 iri 'force, be released on bail with or without surety. 8) What is discernible from the above Section is that a juvenile should be granted bail unless his case falls within one of the exceptions engrafted therein and those are that "there appear reasonable grounds for believing 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 the ends of justice Unless the aforesaid rider is satisfied, bail to a juvenile should not be refused. !t is significant to note that gravity of offence or it's seriousness s!one, divorced from above exceptional reasons, has not been taken as a rider by the legislature to deny bail to a juvenile in conflict with law. It is only danger to his moral, physical and psychological qualities and likelihood of his attaching himself with criminals or his release defeating ends of justice that Board or the courts may not exercise discretion in his favour and enlarge him on bail. For such a determination, no hard and fast rule of inflexible nature can be laid down as it depends on facts and circumstances peculiar to each case. 9) In the instantcase, from perusal of the order of the court below, it is very clear that other co-accused persons, who have been convicted Sections 366, 506, 323/34 of IPC have been acquitted by the trial Court after conclusion of the trial from the charges levelled against them. The present applicant is a juvenile and is in custody since 12-6-2013 and l do not find any reason to reject the bail application. 10) Accordingly, the revision is allowed and impugned order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kabirdham dated 25-7-2013 and order dated 10-7-2013 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Kabirdham are hereby set aside. Applicant Shravan Kumar @ Daulal is directed to be released on bail on his parents'/guardians' executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.20,000/- with two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenite Justice Board, Kabirdham (Kawardha) on a condition that they will keep the applicant in their proper care and custody and will report to the Juvenile Justice Board, Durg on all the dates as are given to them. Raju 'i'l<'^d^- t