- (1.) The petitioner in this CRM under Section 439(1), Cr.P.C, dated August 8, 2013 is seeking bail for his son (a juvenile) who has been accused of offences under Sections 448/326/307/34,IPC and Sections 25/27 Arms Act and is lodged in a home from July 22, 2013.
(2.) The bail prayer has been rejected by the Suri Juvenile Justice Board in Birbhum on Agusut 3, 2013.
(3.) Mr . Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has questioned the maintainability of the CRM. His submission is that the petitioner's remedy, if any, was only under Sections 52 and 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). He has relied on the decision in Sant Das v. State of U.P. and Ors., 2003 CrLJ 3424. Mr. Basu appearing for the petitioner has argued that in view of the expression "or otherwise" used in Section 6(2) of the Act, it is wrong to say that the petitioner's remedy, if any, was only under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act; especially when there is no statutory prohibition against seeking bail under Section 439(1), Cr.P.C. for a juvenile who has been refused bail by a Board under Section 12 of the Act.;