CHHOTU ALIAS KRISHNA KUMAR SIDAR Vs. STATE OF C G
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Chhotu Alias Krishna Kumar Sidar
State Of C G
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) HEARD .
The applicant has preferred this Criminal Revision u/s 53 of the Juvenile
Justice (care and protection of children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as
Act of 2000). The appeal filed by the applicant against the order of rejection
of the bail application by the Juvenile Justice Board has been rejected by the
learned Session Judge by the impugned order.
The case against the applicant is that he an association with Munu
Sidar, Kartik Vaishanav, Chintamani who were hired by one Shyamlal to
execute the offence for a consideration of Rs.1,40,000/- murdered one
Kunuram. Since the present applicant was less than 18 years of age on the
date of incident, the charge sheet was filed against him before the Juvenile
Justice Board as per the Act of 2000. The application for bail was rejected
by the Juvenile Justice Board and the appeal preferred against the said rejection
order, has also been rejected by the learned Session Judge by the impugned
order, recording a finding that possibility of the present applicant coming
into association with known criminals cannot be rule out.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that Kartik Ram has been
arrested by the police and the other co-accused persons who are facing
prosecution under the common law have already been released on bail vide
order of Annexure A-1 and therefore the applicant may also be granted bail.
He further submits that though there was no material available on record
before the Session, Judge to arrive at the above conclusion the appeal has
been rejected purely on conjecture and surmises.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/state opposing
the petition submits that the bail application of the present applicant has
rightly been rejected considering the welfare of the delinquent and the same
does not warrant any interference by this court.
Section 12 of the Act of 2000 provides that only in exceptional cases
where it appears to the Board that there are reasonable grounds for believing
that the release of the delinquent may bring the accused into association of
any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger
or that his release would defeat the ends of justice, the bail can be refused.
From the perusal of the impugned order it is evident that no specific
ground has been mentioned by both the courts below to deny the present
applicant bail on the ground mentioned in section 12 of the Act of 2000.
Thus, taken into consideration the fact that the main accused has already
been released on bail by the High Court I am of the opinion that is a fit case
to grant bail to the present applicant. Accordingly, the revision is allowed
and the orders passed by both the courts below are set aside. It is directed
that on applicant's parents furnishing a bond in the some of Rs. 20,000/-
with two sureties for the like same to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice
Board, the applicant shall be released on bail.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.