IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA ON THE 3^rd OF MARCH, 2022 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 30555 of 2021 Between:-

RAM KHATIK S/O SHRI KISHORI LAL KHATIK , AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT R/OGRAM KHUSHIPURA TEH ANDP.S. BANDA DISTT. (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI ANIL KHARE SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI T.R KURMI, ADVOCATE)

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.P.S.

BANDADISTT. SAGAR MP DISTT SAGAR ,[MP (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. VICTIM A D/O NOT KNOWN NOT MENTION (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI AMIT PANDEY, PANEL LAWYER)

This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This repeat application has been filed on the ground that the applicant is a minor, it is argued that the application for considering of bail application on the ground of Juvenility of applicant was filed before the learned trial Court which was considered by the learned trial Court vide order dated 05/10/2019 has been passed. Wherein, the learned trial Court has rejected the application on the ground that on the date of commission of offence, the applicant is found to be major. It is argued that the date of birth of the victim is recorded as 02/06/2001 and she is found to be a minor by the prosecution agency. The date of birth of the present applicant as per the prosecution is 28/06/2001 i.e he is younger to the victim, the last date of commission of offence is reported to be 05/07/2019 on the basis of which the FIR was got registered. It is argued that if the provisions of POSCO Act are being Signature Not Verified SAN leveled against the present applicant and victim is found to be a minor then how Date: 2022.03.05 11:12:33 IST come the applicant being a major on the date of commission of offence once he is admittedly younger to the victim according to his date of birth. The provisions contained under Section 12 of Juvenile Justice Rule 2007 has not been followed. He has placing reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rishipal Singh Solanki Vs. State of U.P and others reported in 2021 SCC online SC 1079 wherein the aforesaid aspects was dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was held that in case there is a dispute with respect to the age of Juvenile then the procedure as contemplated under the Juvenile Justice Act and Section 12 of the aforesaid act should be followed. No such inquiry was conducted in the present matter. Therefore, the order passed by the leaned trial Court on an application of Juvenility dated 05/10/2019 is being put to challenge before this Court by filling Criminal Revision which is registered at CRR No.5773/2019 and is listed for hearing today along with for analogous hearing.

As far as the bail application is concerned.

This is the forth bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C filed by the applicant for grant of bail. First, second and third bail applications have been dismissed on merits vide orders dated 27/09/2019, 17/12/2019 and 16/10/2020 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos.35638/2019, 50843/2019 and 26962/2020 respectively.

The applicant has been arrested on 10/08/2019 by Police Station-Banda, District Sagar (M.P.) in connection with Crime No.562/2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 of the IPC and under Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case and has not committed any offence in any manner. It is argued that as per the prosecution story, the victim is only approximately a month less than 18 years of age. The factum of relationship on earlier occasion is not disputed in the matter. In such circumstances, the benefit of bail should be extended to the present applicant. He is in custody since 10/08/2019. H e is ready to abide by all terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while considering this bail application. On these ground, he prays for grant of bail.

Per contra, counsel appearing for th