Samer Oraon (Juvenile) v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No.1405 of 2023 …........ Sameer @ Samer Oraon (Juvenile) Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Petitioner …. …. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND ------ : Mr. Aman Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl. PP For the Petitioner For the State -------- 04/02.05.2024
Legal Reasoning
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Spl. PP for the State. 2. The present criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 03.10.2023 passed by the learned Spl. Judge, Children Court, Gumla in Criminal Appeal No.53 of 2023, whereby and whereunder the learned appellate court refused to interfere with the order passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gumla in connection with G.R. Case No.111 of 2023 arising out of Gumla P.S. Case No.184 of 2023 by which the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected. 3. The brief facts leading to this Criminal Revision are that the informant-victim had lodged the FIR with these allegations that on 31.05.2023, she had gone to attend the marriage along with her two friends. At 08:00 O’clock of night, all three were playing music instrument, at that time, two boys were standing there one was Samir Oraon and another was Brij Oraon, both of them caught hold her hands and forced to sit on Scooty. Her two friends fled away from there. She was crying but on account of sound of music, no one could hear the cry of her and these two accused persons took her to the garden by Scooty, where they also called three boys and all five have raped her. However, she managed to come to her house in the night itself at 01:00 O’clock and told in regard to the occurrence to her mother and on the very next day this FIR was lodged against two named accused Samir Oraon, Brij Oraon and three unknown persons. 4. In paragraph No.3 of the case diary, restatement of victim was recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which, she reiterated all those allegations which were made in the written information. 5. In paragraph No.6 of the case diary, the statement of mother, namely, Malti Devi and in paragraph No.7 of the case diary the statement of her father, namely, Akalu Lohra was recorded, who also corroborated the FIR case. 6. In paragraph No.12 of the case diary, the statement of Parwati Kumari and in paragraph No.13 of the case diary, the statement of Rajesh Lohra was recorded, who also corroborated the prosecution story. 7. In paragraph No.19 of the case dairy, the statement of mother of the victim under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded, in which, she also reiterated all the allegations made in the FIR. 8. In view of paragraph No.38 of the case diary, the name of three accused including the petitioner was disclosed by the co-accused, namely, Brij Oraon in his confessional statement. 9. In paragraph No.48 of the case diary, the medical evidence supports the prosecution story. 10. In paragraph No.66 of the case diary, DNA sample of Samir Oraon and Ajeet Oraon was taken and the same was sent for examination to FSL. 11. The friends of the victim were also interrogated under Section 161 of the case diary, both corroborated the prosecution story to the extent dragging the victim by the two accused namely, Samir Oraon and Brij Oraon and the charge-sheet was filed against all five accused including the petitioner. 12. Learned Spl.P.P. opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 13. In social investigation report of the petitioner, his attitude towards his friends and family members is shown cordial. There is no bad habit of the CCL. The CCL has passed Class-12th. No criminal antecedent of the petitioner/CCL is shown. 14. It is the settled law that while disposing of the bail application of a Juvenile the gravity or nature of the offence cannot be taken into consideration. It is also the settled law that ordinarily the bail application of a Juvenile should be allowed unless and until there are exceptional 2 circumstance as laid down under proviso of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act which reads as under : “Section 12, Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law 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 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.” 15.
Decision
In view of the above there is nothing in the social investigation report that after his release on bail he would come in association of the known criminals or his release would expose him to psychological, moral or physical danger or the ends of justice would be defeated. 16. In view of the discussions as made hereinabove, this Court is of the view that the impugned order passed by the learned J.J. Board and the learned Appellate Court needs interference by this Court. 17. Accordingly, the present criminal revision is hereby allowed and the aforesaid orders are, hereby, quashed and set aside. 18. In consequence, thereof, the petitioner – CCL are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each by his guardian to the satisfaction of the court of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gumla in connection with G.R. No.111 of 2023 arising out of Gumla 3 P.S. Case No.184 of 2023, subject to condition that guardian of the Juvenile shall give an undertaking that he would keep vigil eyes on the Juvenile and would control him from coming in association of the known criminals. RKM (Subhash Chand, J.) 4