ANUP Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2013-10-24
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on October 03,2013

Anup (Juvenile) Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Alok Singh, J. - (1.) FOR the reasons stated in the application, delay condonation application No. 1463 of 2013 is allowed. Delay in filing revision is hereby condoned. Present revision is preferred against the order dated 20.06.2012 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar and order dated 27.06.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge Haridwar whereby application moved by the juvenile under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Board (Care and Protection) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'J.J. Act') was rejected. Earlier Criminal Revision No. 217 of 2012 was filed assailing the impugned orders, however Coordinated Bench of this Court, vide order dated 14th March, 2013, was pleased to dismiss the revision as withdrawn with direction to the Juvenile Justice Board to complete the inquiry within a period prescribed under Section 14 of the J.J. Act. It was further observed by this Court that if inquiry is not completed within three months, revisionist may approach this Court again.
(2.) MR . Manish Arora, learned counsel for the revisionist submits that since inquiry is not completed despite order dated 14th March, 2013 passed by this Court, therefore, necessity arose to file this revision. Revisionist is an accused in F.I.R. Case Crime No. 146 of 2012, under Sections 363, 366A and 376(2)(G) I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar. Revisionist was declared juvenile. Application seeking bail under Section 12 of the J.J. Act was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board vide order dated 20.06.2012 and appeal filed by the Juvenile was also dismissed vide judgment dated 27.06.2012, passed by the Sessions Judge Haridwar.
(3.) THIS Court in the case of Akash Singh (Minor) Vs. State of Uttarakhand and another, Criminal Revision No. 106 of 2013, decided on 17.07.2013 has held as under: - Having perused Section 12 of the Act, I have no hesitation to hold that the moment of juvenile is arrested or detained or brought before the Board, ordinarily such juvenile should he released on bail with or without sureties. However, second part of the Section 12 of the Act provides that when juvenile justice board or court for the reasons recorded find that there are reasonable grounds believing that release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or shall expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice, may refuse the Bail. In my considered opinion, bail can be denied to the juvenile only when there is a material on record suggesting that juvenile may join the company of any known -criminal; on release likely to exposes him to moral, physical or psychological danger. There must he some material before the Court to form such opinion and bail should not be denied to juvenile merely on the basis of some assumption or presumption. If for the reasons so recorded, Judge Juvenile Justice Board, finds that juvenile should be placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of fit institution or fit person, he can so direct. If bail is denied juvenile shall be kept in the observation home.;


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