RANCHI, India, Sept. 30 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Aug. 29:
1. Heard Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Bishambhar Shastri, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Kalyan Banerjee, learned counsel for the informant-opposite party no.2.
2. This criminal revision has been preferred for setting-aside the order dated 02.12.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gumla in M.C.A. No.1594/2024, arising out of Ghaghra P.S. Case No.18/2024 (G.R. Case No.604/2024) dated 02.12.2024 as well as the judgment dated 17.01.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children's Court), Gumla in Criminal Appeal Case No.33/2024, whereby, both the learned Courts have been pleased to reject the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a juvenile and at the time of alleged occurrence, he was aged about 14 years. He submits that the petitioner is a student of Class VIII. He further submits that the FIR has been registered against unknown, however, the name of the petitioner has surfaced during the investigation and, thereafter, the petitioner has been taken into custody and he is in observation home since 10.03.2024. He also submits that the petitioner is being represented through his mother and the mother is ready to give undertaking that she will take care of the petitioner and he will not be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger. He submits that the petitioner has remained in observation home for about 18 months and he has got no criminal antecedent. He submits that the learned trial court and the appellate court have been pleased to reject the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground of lack of parental guardianship. On these grounds, he submits that this petition may kindly be allowed.
4. Learned counsel for the State and informant-opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer and submit that the petitioner has confessed before the police about the crime.
5. It is an admitted position that the petitioner was aged about 14 years at the time of alleged crime and he has remained in observation home since 10.03.2024. The petitioner is being represented through his mother and the mother is ready to give undertaking to the effect that the petitioner will not be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger. Further, the petitioner is a student.
6. In view of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the bail to the juvenile is a rule and refusal of the same is an exception and juvenile can be denied bail only on the following three grounds:
(i) If there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal;
(ii) Expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger; or
(iii) The person's release would defeat the ends of justice.
7. From Section 12 of the said Act, it also transpires that seriousness of the alleged offence or the age of the juvenile are also no relevant consideration for denial of bail above 16 years of age and even in heinous offence also, the juvenile is entitled to get bail under section 12 of the Act, 2015. There is no classification, whatsoever, provided in Section 12 of the Act, 2015 with regard to grant of bail. Section 12 of the Act is applicable to all juveniles in conflict with law without any discrimination of any nature. 8. In light of the above discussions and further considering that the mother is representing the petitioner and she is ready to give undertaking and both the learned Courts have been pleased to reject the prayer for bail of the petitioner only on the ground that there is lack of parental guardianship, the Court is satisfied that the reasoning and conclusion given by both the learned Courts, does not sound a reasonable ground to reject the prayer for bail of the petitioner and, as such, the order dated 02.12.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gumla in M.C.A. No.1594/2024, arising out of Ghaghra P.S. Case No.18/2024 (G.R. Case No.604/2024) dated 02.12.2024 as well as the judgment dated 17.01.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children's Court), Gumla in Criminal Appeal Case No.33/2024 are, hereby, set-aside.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x%2Fp8TmP%2BJ5XBcovhGERq2V1U29V%2B8r2GtroDiNCD5Hrp&caseno=Cr.Rev./338/2025&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010095502025&state_code=7&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
