The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV No. 399 of 2024 Nina @ Satya Narayan Pradhan and Others … Petitioners Mr. J. Sahoo, Advocate Sanmat Tandi … Opposite Party -versus- Mr. S.S. Pradhan, AGA Mrs. S. Jena, Advocate (informant) Order No. 03. CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY ORDER(ORAL) 05.10.2024 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode). 2. This Criminal Revision U/S. 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short “the Act”) is directed against the order dated 26.06.2024 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Children’s Court, Bhubaneswar in Crl. Appeal No.57 of 2024 arising out of Nirakarpur P.S. Case No.145 of 2024 for commission of offence punishable U/Ss.341/342/ 354/354(A)/354(B)/354(C)/294/356/506/509/34 of IPC r/w. Section 8 of the POCSO Act and U/Ss. 67/67(A)/67(B) of the IT Act. By the aforesaid order, not only the prayer for bail of the revision-petitioners was turned down, but also the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the PMJJB, Khurda in JGR Case No. 19 of 2024 rejecting Page 1 of 5 the prayer for bail of the petitioner-cum-Child in
Facts
Conflict with Law (CICL) stood confirmed. 3. The facts in precise are that, on 03.02.2024, the petitioners-CICLs, who are the immediate neighbours of the victim, took the victim into a room and misbehaved her as well as captured some intimate scenes of the victim with them through one mobile and the aforesaid intimate scene was forcibly done by the CICLs with the victim and got the intimate scenes viral later on through mobile phone. Accordingly, an F.I.R. was lodged by the mother of the victim against the CICLs on 03.06.2024 after seeing the viral video and such F.I.R. was registered vide Nirakarpur P.S. Case No. 145 of 2024, wherein the petitioners-CICLs were apprehended on 06.06.2024 and sent to the remand home after obtaining an order from the learned PMJJB, Khurda. In the aforesaid backdrop, the petitioners- CICLs moved an application before the learned PMJJB, Khurda U/S. 12 of the Act for grant of bail to them, but when they became unsuccessful, they carried an appeal which was assigned to the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Children’s Court, Bhubaneswar, who also confirmed the order of the learned PMJJB, Khurda and refused to grant bail to the petitioners-CICLs by the order impugned in this revision. Page 2 of 5 4.
Legal Reasoning
After having considered the rival submissions and taking into account the grounds under which the prayer of the petitioners-CICLs have been rejected and regard being had to the orders impugned in this revision which having been passed without properly appreciating the materials to conclude that the release of the petitioners-CICLs would defeat the ends of justice or bring them into association with any known criminal or exposes them to any moral, physical and psychological danger and further taking into account the observation of the LPO in the Social Investigation Report, both the orders passed on dated 18.06.2024 and 26.06.2024 by the learned PMJJB, Khurda and learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Children’s Court, Bhubaneswar in JGR Case No. 19 of 2024 and in Crl. Appeal No.57 of 2024 are unsustainable and liable to be set aside since bail to the juveniles can only be refused in case there exists three grounds as enumerated under the proviso to Section 12 of the Act, which have been Page 3 of 5 referred to above, but the same has not been arrived at on the basis of materials on record. Further, it is the conscious opinion of the Court that bail to the juveniles (CICLs) cannot be refused even if the offence committed by him is heinous in nature, but the only restriction as prescribed in proviso to Section 12 of the Act mandates that only when there exists reasonable grounds to believe that release of the CICL would bring him into association with any known criminals or exposes him to any moral, physical and psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice, the bail to CICL can be refused. 6. In the order impugned in this criminal revision, there is no reference as to how and on what basis, it can be concluded that the release of the revisional-petitioners would bring them into association with any known criminal or exposes them to any moral, physical and psychological danger or their release would defeat the ends of justice. Further, the Social Investigation Report itself reveals that the petitioners-CICLs are first time offenders and no previous bad conduct is found against each of them and the petitioners-CICLs have committed the offence without knowing the legal consequences and in a temporary excitement. 7. In the aforesaid situation and taking into account the detention of the revisional-petitioners in Page 4 of 5 remand home since 06.06.2024 and the progress of investigation, interest of justice can be best served by releasing the petitioners-CICLs on bail, but subject to certain conditions which the guardians of the CICLs have to ensure since the victim is the immediate neighbor of the CICLs. 8. In the result, the criminal revision stands allowed and the order passed by the learned 1st Appellate Court in the appeal impugned in this revision is set aside. Consequently, the order passed by the learned PMJJB, Khurda refusing to grant bail to the petitioners-CICLs is also set aside. 9. As a necessary consequence, the revision- petitioners are allowed to go on bail on such terms and conditions as deems fit and proper by the learned PMJJB, Khurda in addition to the following conditions which is to be ensured by the fathers-guardians of each of the CICLs :-
Arguments
Heard, Mr. Jyotirmaya Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioners-CICLs, Mrs. Sujata Jena, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned AGA in the matter and perused the record. In addition, Mr. S.S. Pradhan, learned AGA made available to the Court the copy of the Social Investigation Report of three petitioners-cum-CICLs which are taken on record. 5.
Decision
(i) the petitioners-CICLs should not be allowed to meet or tease the victim in any manner, (ii) the CICLs should not influence the victim directly or indirectly in any manner, (iii) the CICLs shall prosecute their studies if they are reading in any college or school, (iv) the CICLs should be counseled by the guardians for not to repeat any crime or to commit any offence in future. Accordingly, the CRLREV stands disposed of. (G. Satapathy) Judge Page 5 of 5 10. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASMITA SASMAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Oct-2024 17:34:22 S. Sasmal