ORDER

28.8.2018 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Standing Counsel.

2. The L.C.R. is received from the 3rd Addl. Dist. & Sessions Judge-cum-P.O. C.C. Cuttack (Vc) along with explanation. Perused the explanation and the same is accepted.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Cuttack in J.J.C. No.13 of 2018 has rejected the bail of the present petitioner who was earlier forwarded under Section 302 I.P.C., but later on charge sheet has been submitted under Section 306 I.P.C. According to him, the JJB, Special Court, Cuttack considered the bail application of the petitioner as if the bail application is filed by an adult person. According to him under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short ‘the Act, the petitioner being a juvenile is entitled for bail There is neither any observation of the JJB nor of the Special Court that the bail is liable to be rejected for the three reasons as mentioned in Section 12 of the Act.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there was only allegation against the petitioner-child (CCL) that the deceased while watching the movement of the women members of his house, the petitioner had threatened in him, but there is no material available to show any involvement of the present petitioner to have caused the death of the deceased. There is also no any material available to show that he has abetted the deceased to commit suicide and he is liable for the offence under Section 306 I.P.C. Hence, the order of the Special Court be set aside and the petitioner be released on bail on any condition as deemed fit and proper.

5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel submits that the order of the learned Court below clearly indicates the reasons appropriately to reject the bail. She submits that the petitioner has threatened the deceased to kill him on the allegation that the deceased was watching the women members of the house of the petitioner. Apart from this, by temperament he is not good and rightly his bail has been rejected.

6. Considered the submissions of learned Counsel for the respective parties. Perused the order of the learned Courts below. It appears from the order dated 20.2.2018 the learned JJB after considering the petition did not incline to release the CCL on bail. The only reason mentioned in the order that if the petitioner-CCL is released on bail there is likelihood of interference with the prosecution. The order of the learned Special Judge is more elaborate to show as if he has considered bail of adult whereas petitioner is CCL.

7. Section 12 of the JJ (CPC) Act is as follows :

“12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person.

Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstance that led to such a decision.

Xx xxx xx

8. The aforesaid provision is clear that the petitioner-CCL shall not be released on bail if in the event of release on bail, he is likely to be exposed to psychological or physically danger, if released on bail he would be exposed to harden criminal and if his release would defeat the