SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

SANJAY K.AGRAWAL
Preetam Pathak – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Applicant:Anil Gulati, Advocate
For the Respondent:Wasim Miyan and S.C. Verma, Advocates

JUDGMENT

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.—The short question falling for consideration is whether applicant/juvenile can maintain application for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

2. Invoking jurisdiction of this court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., the applicant herein has filed this application for grant of anticipatory bail as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.195/2014 registered at Police Station, Baikunthpur, District Korea, for the offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC and Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

3. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that applicant herein is admittedly a juvenile within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short, the Act, 2000), and therefore, the provisions contained in Section 438 of Cr.P.C. would not be applicable in the present case and remedy available to the applicant would be to appear before the Juvenile Justice Board (for short, the Board) and to claim bail under Section 12 of the Act, 2000, and as such, application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. preferred by the juvenile/applican

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top