Deepu Oraon v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No.925 of 2023 Deepu Oraon ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND ------ : Ms. Sunita Kumari, Advocate : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, APP For the Petitioner For the State -------- 05/06.12.2023
Legal Reasoning
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The instant Criminal Revision has been directed against the order dated 03.07.2023 whereby the learned appellate court while dismissing the appeal has affirmed the order passed by the learned JJ Board wherein the bail application of the juvenile has been rejected. 3. The brief facts leading to this criminal revision are that the FIR of this case was lodged by the victim herself with these allegations that on 27.02.2023 she had gone to attend the marriage ceremony in the village at 8 O'clock. At 3 O'clock in the night she was coming back alongwith Sati Oraon, Pradip Oraon and Veer Bhudhu Oraon. Amid the way four boys intercepted them and all the four made those childrens to flee away and dragged the informant with them to the isolated place in a Jungle, where two of them had committed rape while the other two who were guarding. One of the four accused had left his motorcycle next day in the morning he came to take his motorcycle to Patratoli that boy was nabbed by the villagers. On interrogation he told that Sunil Oraon, Raju Oraon, Deepu Oraon had also accompanied him and the one boy who has fled away was Suresh Oraon. The victim identified all the four accused among them Sunil Oraon and Suresh Oraon had committed rape while Raju and Dipu Oraon were posted as a guard at the time of commission of the rape by the co-accused. On this written information the case crime no. 61 of 2023 was registered under section 366 A, 376 D A of IPC and section 6 of POCSO Act. 4. The informant victim in her restatement and para-2 of the case diary reiterated the allegations made in the FIR. Her statement is also corroborated with the statement of her father Basia Oraon, the grand-mother of victim Harmine Oraon. 5. The witness Sati Oraon, Pradip Oraon, Veer Ganjhu Oraon, 2 Cr. Rev. No.925 of 2023 Sukhnath Oraon and Bhaiya Oraon also corroborated the prosecution story. 6. In para-58 of the case diary the statement of victim under section 164 of Cr.PC was recorded she corroborated the prosecution story. In view of para-137 of the case diary on the date of occurrence the age of victim was determined 15 years 3 months 27 days. In para-146 of the case diary as per medical examination report of the victim the small fresh two nail abrasions were shown on the cheek. There were also injuries on other parts of the body and the possibility of sexual assault is not ruled out. 7. In social investigation report of the petitioner juvenile his relations with family members are shown cordial. No bad habit is shown. The juvenile is shown to be student of 8th Class. His attitude towards his classmate, friends, teachers and neighbours are shown normal. In whole of the social investigation report there is no criminal antecedent of the CCL is shown. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per allegations made in the FIR the complicity of the petitioner is shown to be present at the place of occurrence as a guard. There is no role of committing rape has been attributed to him and there is nothing adverse against him in the social investigation report. 9. Learned APP for the State opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 10. It is the settled law that the bail application of a juvenile has
Decision
to be disposed of taking into consideration section 12 of JJ Act, 2015 wherein it is provided that the bail application of a juvenile has to be allowed except the circumstances as shown in proviso of section 12 of the J.J. Act. While disposing of the bail application of juvenile the gravity or nature of the offence can not be taken into consideration. As such the bail application of a juvenile is governed under section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015. 11. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 reads as under: “12. (1) 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 3 Cr. Rev. No.925 of 2023 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. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under subsection (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order. (4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail.” 12. In view of the submissions made and material on record also taking into consideration the role of the petitioner only being posted as a guard at the place of occurrence and there being nothing adverse against him in the social investigation report, the impugned order passed by the learned JJ Board which was affirmed by the appellate court is based on perverse finding as both the courts below have not taken into consideration the social investigation report of the juvenile where there is nothing adverse against him. There is no such material in the social investigation report to record the finding that the release of the petitioner juvenile would expose him to psychological, moral or physical danger or he would come in association of known criminal or the ends of justice would be defeated. The order passed by both the courts below being not based on any substantial material. Accordingly, the same needs interference. 13. This Criminal Revision is hereby allowed. The impugned order passed by the learned J.J. Board and the order passed by the learned Appellate Court are set aside. 14. Let the child in conflict with law be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) and two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gumla in connection with Gumla P.S. Case No.61 of 2023, corresponding to Spt. G.R. Case No.54 of 2023 which 4 Cr. Rev. No.925 of 2023 are to be furnished on behalf of the guardian of the child in conflict with law. 15. The guardian of the juvenile is also directed to give an undertaking that he will keep vigil eye upon the juvenile and will control him from coming in association of known criminals. RKM (Subhash Chand, J.)