The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLA No.907 of 2024 (An appeal under Section 101(5) of the Juvenile Justice (C & P) Act, 2015) CICL(Child in Conflict with Law) -versus- State of Odisha …. …. Appellant Respondent Appeared in this case:- For Appellant For Respondent : : CORAM: JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA Mr. J. Panda, Advocate
Legal Reasoning
Mr. T.K. Acharya, Learned Additional Standing Counsel JUDGMENT Date of hearing : 03.12.2024 / date of judgment : 11.12.2024 A.C. Behera, J. This is an appeal under Section 101(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 (in short „the JJ(C&P) Act, 2015), which has been preferred by the appellant(CICL) challenging the rejection order of his bail passed on dated 07.05.2024 by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Page 1 of 10 Bhawanipatna in J.C.T. No.08 of 2024 arising out of Biswanathpur P.S. Case No.08 of 2024. 2. The factual backgrounds of this appeal under Section 101(5) of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, which prompted the CICL for preferring the same is that, when as per order dated 07.05.2024 in J.C.T. Case No.08 of 2023, the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna rejected the bail application of the CICL assigning the reasons that, “there appears reasonable grounds for believing that, his release on bail may likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or would be defeat the ends of justice, for which, his prayer for bail is refused.” Then, he (CICL) preferred this appeal being the appellant challenging the said order of rejection of his bail passed on dated 07.05.2024 in J.C.T. No.08 of 2024, by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna. 3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Standing Counsel for the State, as the aggrieved person of the matter did not choose to participate in the hearing of this appeal in spite of receiving notice for the same through the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State(Respondent). Page 2 of 10 4. During the course of hearing of this appeal, the learned counsel for CICL/appellant submitted that, the above rejection order of bail of the CICL passed by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna is not in conformity with law, because, the said order is not fulfilling any of the essentials of the proviso to Section 12 of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 for the denial of right of privilege of bail of the CICL. 5. As per the provisions of law envisaged in the proviso to Sub- section(1) of Section 12 of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, a CICL can be denied with the privilege of bail, only if, the court of the opinion that, there appears reasonable grounds for (i) believing that, the release of CICL on bail shall bring him into association with any known criminal or (ii) shall expose him to moral, physical and psychological danger or that his such release would defeat the ends of justice and 6. The necessary essentials/criterias indicated above in (i) and (ii) of the proviso to Sub-section(1) of Section 12 of J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 must be there in the record to make out any of the above grounds out of two, which may persuade the court not to release the CICL on bail. 7. As per the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, the nature and gravity of the situations/circumstances, in which, the CICL was involved, has no significance or bearing in the matter of consideration of bail of a CICL. Page 3 of 10 So, a CICL has to be released on bail irrespective of the nature and gravity of the situations/circumstances, if the necessary criterias indicated in the proviso to Sub-section(1) of Section 12 of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 for the refusal of the same are not fulfilled. 8. The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 is a beneficial legislation, which has been enacted / drafted to reform the child. The object of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 is, to achieve the betterment of the child including CICL. It has a reformative approach. If it is found that, the ends of justice would be benefited or the, desired goals of the legislation can be achieved by detaining a CICL in a Juvenile Home or place of safety, only in that case, the bail of the CICL can be denied. 9. Therefore, as per the mandate of the provisions of Section 12 of the J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015, a CICL has to be released on bail, irrespective of the nature of gravity of the matter, because, bail for the CCL is the rule and refusal is an exception. The right of privilege of bail of the CICL can be denied, only on the basis of sufficient materials with clear and valid reasons for the same, i.e., enlargement on bail to the CICL shall be detrimental to the interest of the CICL or the refusal of his bail would benefit the ends of justice. Page 4 of 10 10. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified by the Hon‟ble Courts and Apex Court in the ratio of the following decisions :- (i) 2020(2) OJR-73(S.C.) : Exploitation of Children in Orphanages in the State of Tamil Nadu vrs. Union of India and others— J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015— Sections 10 & 12—Bail—The only embargo created for bail of the CICL is that, (i) in case the release of the child likely bring into association with known criminals or (ii) expose the child to moral, physical or psychological danger or where the release of the child would defeat the ends of justice. (ii) 2016(1) CLT Crl. (Supp.)-Criminal-17 : Pankaj Kumar Malik vrs. State of Odisha— J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015—Sections 12 & 53—Bail—Release on bail of the CICL is a rule, but refusal is an exception, which can only be done in the existence of circumstances detrimental to the interest of the CICL or if the same would defeat the ends of justice—Heinousness and seriousness of an offence has got nothing to do in consideration of the prayer for bail of the CICL. (iii) 2016(4) Crime-78(Madras) : Vigneshwaran @ Vignesh Ram vrs. State— J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015— Section 12—Bail—So far as juveniles are concerned, grant of bail is the rule and non-grant of bail is only an exception.(Para-7) (iv) 2016(4) Crime-188(Allahabad): Amit Yadav Alias Monu Alias Bebo vrs. State of U.P. and Anr.— J.J.(C&P) Act, 2000—Section 12—Bail—If there are no imminent chances of his repeating the crime, bail to a juvenile should not be ordinarily refused. (v) 2009 Cr.L.J. : A Juvenile vrs. State of Orissa 2002(Orissa) “A Juvenile needs parental protection and guidance to bring him back to the main-stream of the society from which he has strayed. Thus, his release on bail would aid the ends of justice rather than defeat it.” (vi) 2020(S.C.) Suo Motu Writ Petition(Civil) No.04 of Page 5 of 10 The JJBS and Children‟s Court shall consider in taking steps to release all children on bail, unless there are clear and valid reasons for the application of the proviso JJ(C&P) Section Act, 2015 for the refusal of their bails. 12 to : Manish (vii) 2011(4) Crimes-204(Jharkhand) Kumar vrs. The State of Jharkhand— J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015— Section 12—Bail—Bail to Juvenile is rule and refusal is an exception. When the case of the CICL does not come within proviso to Section 12, then the CICL is deserved for bail. (viii) 2023(1) Crimes-406(Jharkhand) : Shahnawaz Hussain vrs. The State of Jharkhand— J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015— Section 12—Bail—When the CICL has no criminal history and the possibility of the CICL in coming with association of any known criminal is very remote, then the CICL is to be granted on bail. 2024(4) Crimes-264(Uttarakhand) : X vrs. State (ix) of Uttarakahand—J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015—Section— 12—All decisions regarding child shall be based on primary consideration that they are in best interest of child and to help child to develop full potential. 11. It is the mandate of Section 3 (viii) of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015 in administration of that Act that, “The Central Government, The State Governments, the Board, and other agencies, as the case may be, while implementing the provisions of this Act, shall be guided by the following fundamental principles, namely:- (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) vi) xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx Page 6 of 10 xx xx (vi) xx (vii) xx (viii) Principle of non-stigmatizing semantics-Adversarial or accusatory words are not to be used in the processes pertaining to a child. xx xx xx xx (ix) xx xx xx xx xx xx xx ” xx 12. In this appeal at hand, the impugned order passed pertaining to the CICL(petitioner), which is under challenge in this appeal is not free from the use of accusatory words, for which, the said order is not in proper administration of the Act, i.e., The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified by the Hon‟ble Courts in the ratio of the following decision:- 2021(2) Crimes 107(Patna) : Sumit Kumar vrs. State of Bihar—Any order relating to a juvenile passed by any court shall have no effect in eyes of law, if the same be passed in non-conformity with provisions of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.(Para-11) 13. When the leaned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna neither has perused nor has referred to any social investigation report for the rejection of bail of the CICL, for which, it is held that, the reasons assigned by the learned leaned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna in J.C.T. No.08 of 2024, for the refusal of bail of the CICL on presumptions, surmises/inferences and guess works without referring any social investigation report cannot be sustainable under law. Because, Page 7 of 10 the prayer for bail of the CICL cannot be considered dehors(without) social investigation report. Therefore, passing of the impugned order, i.e., refusal of bail of the CICL(appellant) by the learned leaned Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna without referring any social investigation report, has rendered such order illegal automatically. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decision:- CRR 53 of 2021(O&M) (P&H) : Vishvas vrs. (i) State of Punjab (dated on 08.02.2021) Para-16—J.J. (C&P) Act, 2015—Section 12—Bail—An application under Section 12 of the Act for bail of the CICL cannot be decided without taking into consideration to the social investigation report submitted by the probation officer. 14. On analysis of the matter as per the decisions and observations made above, it is held that, the impugned order, i.e., an order for refusal of bail of the CICL/appellant passed on 07.05.2024 by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna in J.C.T. No.08 of 2024 cannot be sustainable under law for the following reasons:- (i) the impugned order has been passed using accusatory words pertaining to CICL in contravention with Section 3(viii) of The J.J.(C&P) Act, 2015. Page 8 of 10 (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) absence of any material in the record to show that, the CICL was subjected to any form of abuse or was a victim of any similar situation earlier or was mixed with any bad associate earlier. absence of any material to show about any imminent chance in repeating the similar circumstance by the CICL. absence of any material to show about any possibility or chance of fleeing away from the process of justice, in case of release of the CICL on bail. passing of the impugned order in contravention with law without any social investigation report and absence of any material in the record to show that, the father-guardian of the CICL has any bad record, rather the father-guardian of the CICL has sworn through an affidavit that, he will take proper care of the CICL being his natural father guardian after release of the CICL on bail. So, there is justification under law, for making interference with the impugned order through this appeal filed by the CICL(appellant). As such, there is merit in this appeal of the appellant (CICL). The same must succeed. 15. In result, the appeal filed by the CICL (appellant) is allowed on merit. 16. The impugned order dated 07.05.2024 passed in J.C.T. No.08 of 2024 by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna is set aside. 17. The prayer for bail of the CICL (appellant) is allowed. 18. The learned Additional District Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna is directed to release the CICL Page 9 of 10 (appellant) on bail with required bail bond/ bonds imposing lawful conditions as it deems fit and proper with a compulsory condition that:- the father-guardian of the CICL shall furnish an undertaking that, he will not allow the CICL to come in contact with his any bad associate and the CICL shall not indulge with any unlawful/illegal activities.
Decision
19. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is disposed of finally. Registry is directed to transmit the copy of this order to the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children‟s Court), Bhawanipatna in reference to J.C.T. Case No.08 of 2024 forthwith for information and lawful compliances on the basis of this order. Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 11th of December, 2024/ Jagabandhu, P.A. ( A.C. Behera ) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: JAGABANDHU BEHERA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK Date: 12-Dec-2024 17:46:20 Page 10 of 10