Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 659 (RAJ)

ARJUN BANJARA (MINOR) v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

2018-02-28

DEEPAK MAHESHWARI

body2018
JUDGMENT : DEEPAK MAHESHWARI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as also learned Public Prosecutor. 2. This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 03.02.2018 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Alwar whereby the appeal filed by the accused-petitioner Arjun under Section 101 of Juvenile Justice Act has been rejected. 3. Counsel for the petitioner contends that this appeal has been rejected only on the ground that the possibility of the accused-petitioner Arjun of coming into association with known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger cannot be ruled out on his coming into contact with Co-accused Amir Khan and Subhash. 4. Counsel submits that this apprehension expressed by the learned Sessions Judge is without any substance. He has further contended that gravity of nature of the offence is the relevant factor while deciding the appeal filed under the provision of Juvenile Justice Act. 5. Counsel for the petitioner has also drawn attention of the Court to the report given by Superintendent, Government Observations and Juvenile home, Alwar wherein it has been stated that no other criminal case has been registered against the Juvenlie Arjun as also against his father, ward number of Ward No. 3 of municipality Khairthal has also stated that conduct of the Juvenile is objectionable. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer. 7. From perusal of Section 12(1) of the Act of 2000, it is clear that a delinquent juvenile ordinarily has to be released on bail irrespective of nature of offence alleged to have been committed by him unless it is shown by evidence that if he is released on bail, there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release of the delinquent juvenile is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. The nature of offence and the merits of the case do not have any relevance. It is for the prosecution to bring on record such material while opposing the bail and make out any of the grounds provided in the section, which may persuade the Court not release the juvenile on bail. The nature of offence and the merits of the case do not have any relevance. It is for the prosecution to bring on record such material while opposing the bail and make out any of the grounds provided in the section, which may persuade the Court not release the juvenile on bail. But in this case, there is nothing on record to show that the release of the petitioner is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. 8. In view of the report dated 14.09.2017 filed by the Probation Officer, Alwar nothing has come on record which can suggest that the Juvenile will again come into contact with known criminal or will be expose to moral, physical or psychological danger. The Juvenile is stated to be detained in the observation home since 14.09.2017. 9. In view of whatever is stated above, the revision petition deserves to be allowed. It is directed that father of the accused-petitioner furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Court, Alwar within accused-petitioner Arjun may be released on bail. 10. The revision petition stands allowed.