Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 42503
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, J
Child Under Conflict With Law – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3519 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sudeep Kumar Patel
For the Respondents: N.S. Solanki
Under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, bail for a juvenile cannot be rejected solely on the gravity of the offence; refusal requires objective evidence that release would expose the juvenile to harm, criminal association, or defeat the ends of justice.
Headnote:(A) Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - Section 12 - Bail to juvenile - Gravity of offence - Not a ground for rejection - Bail can only be denied if reasonable grounds exist to believe that the release is likely to bring the juvenile into association with any known criminal, expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice - Courts failed to record findings on these contingencies despite absence of material in Probationary Officer’s report. (Paras 10, 13, 20)
(B) Social Investigation Report - Significance - Under Section 13(1)(ii) - Requires objective assessment of juvenile’s background and circumstances - Assessment must be based on concrete evidence rather than unfounded apprehensions. (Paras 18, 19, 20)
Facts of the case:
A sixteen-year-old boy was booked for offences under the IPC, POCSO Act, and IT Act. His bail application before the Juvenile Justice Board and a subsequent appeal were dismissed primarily on the grounds of the seriousness of the offence, despite the applicant having no prior criminal record.
Findings of Court:
The Court held that the rejection of bail based solely on the gravity of the offence is contrary to the mandate of the Act. As there was no material evidence to support the exceptions listed in Section 12, the impugned orders were set aside.
Issues: Whether the rejection of bail for a juvenile based on the gravity of the offence and without concrete findings under the exceptions of Section 12 is legally sustainable.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the intent of the legislation is to grant bail to juveniles as a rule, and refusal is an exception that must be supported by objective material proving the specific dangers listed in Section 12; mere gravity of the offence is insufficient for denial.
Result: Revision allowed; bail granted.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of facts regarding the detention of a juvenile and the procedure followed in lower courts. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. interpretation of section 12 of the j.j. act 2015 emphasizing that the gravity of the offence is secondary to the requirement for specific exceptions. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 3. final reasoning and order directing the release of the juvenile on bail with specified conditions. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
ORDER
This revision petition has been preferred under Section 397 /401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “J.J. Act, 2015”) against the appeal judgment dated 03.06.2024 passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Mandla in Criminal Appeal No.44/2024 of Police Station Maharajpur District Mandla (M.P.) for commission of offence under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) of IPC, Section 5(L)/(6) of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 66E , 67B of Information Technology Act whereby the appeal preferred against the order dated 24.05.2024 passed in Crime No.301/2024 of the aforesaid police station by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mandla has been dismissed and order rejecting the bail application of the juvenile in conflict with law has been affirmed.
2. As per the allegations, on 22.05.2024, 16 years and almost 11 months old prosecutrix submitted an application in writing before the Police alleging that her date of birth is 27.06.2007 and for the last one year she was living with her maternal grandmother. Sonu Tilgam is the neighbour of her maternal grandmother. They came into contact with each other and started chatting and talking with each other on phone and video call for the last one year. It is alleged that on 18.09.2023, when her mother had gone in neighbourhood for performing Pooja and she was alone at home, Sonu Tilgam came and told that he loved her and committed rape upon her. He also used to say that he loves her but she did not love him and if she loves him then she has to take off her clothes. Sonu took her photographs through video call and thereafter he started to blackmail her saying that he will send her photographs to her parents. It was further alleged that on 07.05.2024 Sonu took her towards agriculture field situated road side and committed rape/aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her. On 17.05.2024 Sonu from his mobile forwarded her obscene photographs on her father's mobile. Her parents after watching photographs enquired from her. FIR was registered. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed before the Juvenile Justice Board.
3. Juvenile in conflict with law was apprehended on 23.05.2024. Blood samples were taken for DNA examination. DNA report has been received but the same is inconclusive.
4. At the time of commission of offence, applicant was found to be 16 years and 03 months old. Social Investigation Report was called wherein it was observed by the Probationary Officer that juvenile in conflict is in bad company. He has no repentance for his act. It was also observed that he has committed heinous offence related to woman. No description was given about his family background. Probationary Officer has nowhere mentioned that if juvenile is released on bail, he may come into association of known criminals. He has also not mentioned any incident on the basis of which, it may be said that he is in bad company or he is a previous offender. Learned Juvenile Justice Board has observed that if juvenile in conflict with law is released on bail, his release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal, or expose him to moral, physical, or psychological danger, or that his release will defeat the ends of justice. No other offence except the present one is registered against him.
5. An Application under Section 12 of the J.J. Act for grant of bail to juvenile was filed before the Juv
