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

2008 Supreme(P&H) 1151

2009 (4) RCR(Cri) 440
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RAJESH BINDAL, J
Vikas Yadav - Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana - Respondent
Criminal Revision No.722 of 2008 (O&M)
Decided on : 01.07.2008

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Jai Vir Yadav, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Ajay Ghengas, DAG, Haryana.

Bail for juveniles is a matter of right unless exceptional circumstances exist, and evidence is required to substantiate claims that the release of the juvenile would defeat the ends of justice.

Headnote:

Juvenile - Bail Application - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 - Section 12 - 302/34 IPC, 25/54/59 of Arms Act - [Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, Sections 302/34 IPC, 25/54/59 of Arms Act] - The court discussed the provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, emphasizing that bail for juveniles is a rule and can only be rejected in exceptional circumstances where there is a reasonable ground to believe that the release of the juvenile is likely to bring them into association with known criminals or expose them to moral, physical, or psychological danger. The court cited previous judgments to support the principle that the release of a juvenile on bail is a matter of right unless exceptional circumstances exist, and emphasized the need for evidence to substantiate claims that the release of the juvenile would defeat the ends of justice.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a juvenile, was accused of shooting dead a classmate with a revolver in the school premises. His bail application was rejected by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, and the Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner challenged these rejections in court.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the rejection of the petitioner's bail application was erroneous as there was no evidence to support the claim that his release would bring him into association with known criminals or expose him to moral, physical, or psychological danger. The court emphasized that the release of a juvenile on bail is a matter of right unless exceptional circumstances exist.

Issues: The main issue was whether the rejection of the petitioner's bail application was justified under the Juvenile Justice Act, considering the absence of evidence to support the claim that his release would defeat the ends of justice.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that bail for juveniles is a rule and can only be rejected in exceptional circumstances where there is evidence to substantiate claims that the release of the juvenile would bring them into association with known criminals or expose them to moral, physical, or psychological danger.

Final Decision: The court directed that the petitioner be released on bail pending trial to the satisfaction of the Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon on furnishing of bail bonds.

JUDGMENT

Rajesh Bindal J

1. The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order dated 28.1.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against rejection of his application for release on bail by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon, was dismissed.

2. The petitioner, who is a juvenile, is an accused in FIR No.270 dated 11.12.2007 registered under Sections 302/34 IPC and 25/54/59 of Arms Act at Police Station, Sector 40, Gurgaon. He is a student of Class - 8 in Euro International School, Gurgaon. The allegations against the petitioner is that in a fight, Akash and the petitioner shot dead Abhishek son of Ravinder, their class mate with the use of revolver in the school premises. The application for bail filed by the petitioner was rejected by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board/ Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon on 18.1.2008. In appeal against the order, the petitioner failed even before the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurgaon.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short, `the Act') and relying upon judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Gopinath Ghosh v. The State of West Bengal, 1984(1) RCR (Criminal) 444 and this Court in Atul Kumar and another v. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) RCR (Criminal) 404 and Ramesh alias Meshu v. State of Haryana, 2005(1) RCR (Criminal) 65 submitted that the bail to juvenile is a rule and rejection can only in case there are reasonable ground to believe that release of the juvenile is likely to bring him in association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger. The submission is that none of the ingredients is available which could enable the Courts below to form an opinion that there exist such circumstances which are sufficient to reject the bail application of the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner is a Class-8 student with no criminal background, even his parents are also not involved in any criminal activity. It would be in the fitness of things that the petitioner is kept at home in the company and supervision of his parents instead of keeping him in orphanage where he may come in contact with other criminals or orphans who may have some criminal background as well.

4. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Gopinath Ghosh's case (supra), considering the prayer for bail by a juvenile, who was an accused for offence committed under Section 302 IPC opined as under:-

“It clearly transpires from a combined reading of the sections hereinbefore extracted that where a Juvenile delinquent is arrested, he/she has to be produced before a Juvenile court and if no Juvenile Court is established for the area, amongst others, the Court of Session will have powers of a Juvenile court. Such a Juvenile delinquent ordinarily has to be released on bail irrespective of the nature of the offence alleged to have been committed unless it is shown that there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him under the influence of any criminal or expose him to moral danger or defeat the ends of justice.”

5. This Court in Ramesh alias Meshu's case (supra) while considering the prayer for bail by a juvenile accused for offence under Sections 376, 452 and 325 IPC opined as under:-

“I have heard the argument of the counsel for the parties and gone through the impugned orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat. In my opinion, rejection of bail application of the petitioner by the Courts below only on the ground that it will defeat the ends of justice, is wholly erroneous. The prosecution has not produced any material or evidence that release of the petitioner will defeat the ends of justice. The granting of bail to a juvenile is must notwithstanding anything contained in the Code






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 Back to top