Decided on September 07,2005

Chhotu Alias Krishna Kumar Sidar Appellant
State Of C G Respondents


- (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. Bail Granted.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.