Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 772 (JHR)

Avinash Kumar v. State of Jharkhand

2023-06-15

NAVNEET KUMAR

body2023
JUDGMENT : NAVNEET KUMAR, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. 2. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated 25.11.2022 passed by court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I cum Children Court, Latehar in Criminal Appeal No. 48 of 2022 whereby the learned appellate court has affirmed the order dated 29.09.2022 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Latehar in connection with Latehar SC/ST P.S. Case No. 06 of 2022 corresponding to E.R. No. 28 of 2022 u/s 337, 307, 504/34 of the IPC and 3(1)(2) of the SC/ST Act whereby the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected. 3. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is a child in conflict with law aged about 12 years and it is alleged that this petitioner had thrown stone upon the deceased Vikash Kumar (Victim) by which he sustained injuries and he became unconscious and further it is alleged that during course of treatment after two months he succumbed to the injuries. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the incident had occurred on 29.06.2022 and this case was instituted on 27.08.2022 after a gap of about two months when the injured Vikash Kumar succumbed to the injuries, which is alleged to have been sustained by him when the petitioner had thrown stone, which hit his head. In this view of the matter, it is further submitted that at most it is a case of rash and negligent act under Section 304A of the IPC, which is bailable in nature and it is not a case under Section 304 IPC i.e. culpable homicide. It has also been pointed out that it is evident from the prosecution case itself that the injured boy succumbed to the injury after two months and there had not been any knowledge of intention of this petitioner for killing the deceased in order to attract the offence punishable under Section 304 of the IPC. Although the charge has been framed and petitioner is facing inquiry before the Juvenile Justice Board inter-alia under Section 304 of the IPC. Although the charge has been framed and petitioner is facing inquiry before the Juvenile Justice Board inter-alia under Section 304 of the IPC. Further, it has been submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 02.09.2022 and as per the social investigation report there is no criminal history against this petitioner and it is stated that there is lack of proper guardianship and care and he has been the student of class-III at the time of occurrence. Therefore, in the interest of justice one opportunity may be given to the petitioner to come to the main stream of the society after enlarging him on bail. 4. On the other hand learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the contentions raised by the petitioner and submitted that this petitioner has criminal instinct and therefore, there is a possibility of coming of this petitioner into the association of the known criminal and therefore, he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, perused the record. 6. Petitioner is a child in conflict with law and aged about 12 years at the time of commission of offence and he is in custody since 02.09.2022. It is found that in the alleged incident this petitioner had hit the deceased Vikash Kumar (Victim) by a stone on 29.06.2022 and after two months of the treatment in the hospital he succumbed to the injuries due to septicemia. It has also been pointed out that at most this is case of rash and negligent act under Section 304 A IPC and in no stretch of imagination this case comes under Section 304 of the IPC i.e. culpable homicide because from the prosecution story itself it is found that neither there had been any knowledge or intention of this petitioner to kill the deceased. From perusal of the social investigation report it is found that there is no criminal history against the petitioner and possibility of coming of this petitioner into the association of known criminal is very remote. From perusal of the social investigation report it is found that there is no criminal history against the petitioner and possibility of coming of this petitioner into the association of known criminal is very remote. Further, it is found that petitioner is a student of Class-III and due to negligence of the parents and lack of parental care and social backwardness he is alleged to have committed such offence and therefore, in the interest of justice if he is not released on bail, it might cause prejudice to the mental, moral, physical, psychological mind of the child. It has also come in the case diary that the alleged incident had taken place at the playground while the children were playing including this petitioner and the victim. It has also come in the social investigation report that he wanted to continue his education and that the living condition of the child is very poor and he has been enjoying a very cordial and friendly relationship with his peers and very obedient and respectful to the elders. 7. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it is found just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 8. Accordingly, the petitioner named above is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Latehar in connection with Latehar SC/ST Case No. 06 of 2022 corresponding to E.R. No. 28 of 2022 subject to the condition as set out under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. and with further subject to the conditions, inter-alia as under: (i) The father of the petitioner will be one of the bailers. (ii) The father of the petitioner will give an undertaking that he will take proper care and attention of the child and he will admit him in a school for further studies. (iii) The Secretary, DLSA is directed to take proper steps for counselling of the child and also facilitate him to get him admitted in a school and also to ensure that he properly attends the school and continue with his studies with the help of Legal cum Probation officer. (iv) Any other condition or conditions as the learned Court below may deem it fit and proper in the interest of child. (iv) Any other condition or conditions as the learned Court below may deem it fit and proper in the interest of child. (v) Petitioner will cooperate in the trial of this case, which is going on and he will remain present on each and every date fixed in this case, failing which, learned court below will pass appropriate order for cancellation of his bail. 9. Accordingly, this criminal Revision is allowed. The impugned judgment dated 25.11.2022 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 48 of 2022 by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum Children Court, Latehar affirming the order dated 29.09.2022 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Latehar in connection with Latehar SC/ST P.S. Case No. 06 of 2022 corresponding to E.R. No. 28 of 2022 is set aside. 10. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Secretary, DLSA, Latehar, the Principal District Judge cum Chairman, DLSA, Latehar and the Deputy Commissioner cum Vice Chairman, DLSA, Latehar through FAX to ensure that the Secretary, DLSA complies the direction in letter and spirit as passed by this Court without any hindrances and obstacles.