Bail for juveniles is mandatory unless specific grounds exist showing that release may harm their welfare or obstruct justice, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.

JUDGMENT :

JITENDRA KUMAR, J.

1. The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the impugned order dated 01.11.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1^st cum Special Judge SC/ST & Children Court, Buxar, in Adult Children Case No. 14 of 2023 arising out of Bagengola P.S. Case No. 100 of 2020 whereby the learned court below has rejected the bail petition of the appellant holding as follows:- “Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of this case and from perusal of case record, including the Social Investigation Report, it is found that the CICL “R” had been actively involved in this case and during investigation it has come that CICL “R” had committing the murder of father of informant in connivance with other co-accused persons. The CICL “R” has also associated with criminal activities and had a bad company. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances there is every chance for the CICL “R” that his release would likely to bring him into association with other known criminals or expose him to moral, physical and psychological danger and his release would also defeat the ends of justice. Hence the prayer of bail of CICL “R” is hereby disposed off.”

2. The prosecution case as emerging from the Fardbeyan of the informant is that at 2:00 PM on 20.08.2024 when the informant and his father were cutting grass for fodder of their animals, co-villagers Vijay Pandey, Ajay Pandey, Uma Shankar Pandey, Vikramaditya Pandey, Manish Pandey, Rakesh Rai (appellant herein) and Sanjay Rai along with four unknown persons came to the place of occurrence with country made pistols and guns in their hands and soon after visiting the place, Vijay Pandey stated that they had to kill the informant and his father, both, because they are litigating in court in regard to the land. Vijay Pandey also fired at his father hitting him near the left ear. Ajay Pandey fired at the informant hitting near his neck. Uma Shankar Pandey also fired at his father hitting his back. His father fell down. Rest persons also fired at the informant. But he was able to escape from the firing. Thereafter, all the accused persons went back doing firing. The incident has been witnessed to by three persons including Hardev Rai and Pravin Kumar Pandey who were also cutting grass. His father died on the place of occurrence itself.

3. On the claim of the appellant to be juvenile, his case was separated and sent to the Juvenile Justice Board, Buxar, and after inquiry, he was declared to be juvenile vide order dated 9.4.2021 and, thereafter, on preliminary assessment by the Juvenile Justice Board, Begusarai, his case was transferred to Children Court for trial under Section 18(3) of JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT , 2015 vide order dated 21.06.2023 and, hence, it was registered as Adult Children Case No. 14 of 2023 by the Children Court. The appellant moved for regular bail before the Children Court and the same was rejected by the impugned order.

4. Social Investigation Report is also on record. As per the this report, the petitioner has no physical handicap. His grand-parents are illiterate whereas the father of the appellant is 9^th class pass and he is said to be working in Rajasthan as a labourer. His mother is also an illiterate lady and house wife. His younger brother is 12 years of age and student of 7^th Class. His younger sister is also 11 years old and she is also a school student. Health of all the family members are normal. The relationship of the petitioner has been shown to be cordial with all the family members. It is also stated that prior to the presen