Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 469 (MP)

Ankush @ Kittu v. State of M. P.

2015-04-23

B.D.RATHI

body2015
ORDER 1. Present revision petition preferred under section 53 of Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection of Children) Act, 2000 in short the “Act” read with section 397/401 of CrPC is directed against an order dated 24th January, 2015 passed in Criminal Appeal No.5/2015, by the Sessions Judge, Datia (M.P.), whereby the order dated 12.12.2014 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Datia has been made absolute. 2. By the said order dated dated 12.12.2014, the Principal Magistrate has rejected the application of the petitioner/accused moved for his release on bail under section 12 of the said Act. 3. Facts, as borne out from perusal of the case are that on 8.10.2014 in between 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. in night, Ku. Khushi, aged 6 years, daughter of the complainant Mukesh was found missing in the house. On 10.10.2014, her dead-body was found in the bushes near Jagdamba temple. During investigation, it was gathered that the petitioner/accused after kidnapping and committing rape caused her death. The accused was arrested and being juvenile, he was brought before the Juvenile Board. In the meantime, he submitted an application for bail which was rejected vide order dated 12.12.2014. Being aggrieved from that order, an appeal under section 52 of the Act was preferred before the learned Sessions Judge. Same has been dismissed under the impugned order, hence, this revision. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the lower appellate Court has committed an illegality in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner-accused for bail while dismissing his appeal. No satisfactory reasons have been assigned in the impugned order and therefore rejection order is bad in law. In support of his submission, learned counsel has placed reliance on decision in the case of Sandeep v. State of Chhattisgarh ( 2007 CrLJ 1942 ). 5. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State contended that considering the nature of crime committed by the petitioner, no illegality or perversity appears to have been committed by the Courts-below in passing the orders. It is therefore prayed that the revision may be dismissed. 6. Having regard to the arguments canvased by both the sides, the entire case has been perused with the aid of relevant provisions of law under the Act. 7. It is therefore prayed that the revision may be dismissed. 6. Having regard to the arguments canvased by both the sides, the entire case has been perused with the aid of relevant provisions of law under the Act. 7. The provision contained in section 12 of the Act lays down that if a juvenile accused is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall not be released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that this release would defeat the ends of justice. 8. Thus, every juvenile for whatsoever offence he is charged with, shall be released on bail except under the above circumstances. Admittedly, the bail application of juvenile can be rejected, if the above grounds or any one of them appear to be existed against him. 9. On perusal of the present case, it is clear that the application for bail has been rejected by the Board and on appeal by the learned Sessions Judge on the ground of seriousness of the crime but nowhere such reasons or grounds are indicated for believing that the release of the delinquent juvenile is likely to bring him into association with any known/unknown criminals or that his release would otherwise defeat the ends of justice. In that view of the matter, refusal of bail would be against the intention of the Act. 10. In view of above, the revision stands allowed. The order dated 24th January, 2015 passed in Criminal Appeal No.5/2015, by the Sessions Judge, Datia (M.P.) as well as the order dated 12.12.2014 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Datia are hereby set aside. The petitioner through his guardian is directed to move afresh for bail before the Juvenile Board and if such an application is moved, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Court subject to the condition that the parents/guardian of the juvenile shall keep him present on each and every dates of hearing before the Board and shall not allow their child to remain in the company of any known/unknown criminals. 11. Fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Court subject to the condition that the parents/guardian of the juvenile shall keep him present on each and every dates of hearing before the Board and shall not allow their child to remain in the company of any known/unknown criminals. 11. Failure to comply with aforesaid conditions shall entail automatic dismissal of the bail granted to the accused. 12. A copy of this order be sent to the Courts-below for compliance.