The court emphasized that the gravity of the offence alone does not justify denying bail to juveniles; potential dangers to society and the juvenile's welfare must be considered.

Order :

(Arvind Kumar Verma, J.)

This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as "J.J. Act") against the order impugned dated 06.06.2024 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Janjgir-Champa in Criminal Appeal No. 54/2024 arising out of Crime No.17/2024 for commission of offences under Sections 363,302,201, 120-B, 147,148 and 149 of IPC whereby appeal has been dismissed and the order dated 24.04.2024, passed by the Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Janjgir in Cr. Case No. 62/2024 rejecting the bail application of child in conflict with law has been affirmed.

2. As per prosecution case, on 09.01.2024, at about 12.30 p.m. complainant Mukund Yadav lodged a missing report alleging that his son namely Rajesh Yadav, student of class 11 went with one Deepak Tandon in his motorcycle to watch the cultural program at Godna and did not return. He was having suspicion that his son might have been abducted and therefore the report was lodged against unknown persons under Section 363 IPC. Thereafter on 12.01.2024, at about 10.00 pm. dead body of the his son was found near Barbhata canal. During merg inquiry, the police collected the evidence against the present applicants/juvenile in conflict with law that the applicants were classmates of the deceased and the applicant No.1 and the deceased over liking their schoolmate (girl). Memorandum statements of the juvenile in conflict with law were recorded and the clothes and weapon of offence were seized. The juveniles were found to be 17 years and 11 months and 16 years of age, respectively.

3. An application for bail to the juveniles under Section 12 of the Act was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board but same was declined. Thereafter, an appeal preferred on behalf of the juvenile was also dismissed. Learned Sessions Judge has taken into account the facts that their release is likely to bring them into association with known criminal, expose them to moral, physical or psychological danger and would defeat the ends of justice.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants/juvenile in conflict with law has submitted that at the time of commission of offence, juveniles were below 18 years of age and they have no criminal antecedents. They have been falsely implicated without any material evidence. It is further submitted that there is no evidence on record that if the juveniles are released on bail, their release is likely to bring them into association with any known criminal, expose them to moral, physical or psychological danger and would defeat the ends of justice. No such findings has been recorded as to how they will come into association with any known criminal, or how it will expose them to moral, physical or psychological danger and would defeat the ends of justice. The father of applicant No.1 is ready to give an undertaking that if juvenile is released on bail he will keep him in his custody and will look after him properly by providing better education. So far as applicant No.2 is concerned, his father has died, he is a regular student of class 11 and the brother of the applicant is ready to take the custody and the further submitted that Juvenile Justice Board as well as appellate Court have not properly appreciated the facts of the case and have passed the impugned order in a cursory manner without considering the object of the law enacted for the benefit of juvenile and have refused to release them on bail.

5. Learned counsel for the State has supported the impugned judgment and order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate Court and has contended that that the juveniles had committed a heinous offence in a pre-planned manner as after committing double murder ie. of Rajesh and Deepak with iron pipe and rod, they threw threw the dead bodies in the pit and covered with straw, the motorcycle was thrown in the pond near Mudhpar Road whereas the weapon of off