SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rajaram Thr. His Guardian Bapulal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 May, 2018

Cr.R. No.118/2018 1

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Cr.R. No.118/2018
(Rajaram minor through his father vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

Indore, Dated:15/05/2018

Shri Manoj Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Vishal Sannotia, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
ORDER

This criminal revision preferred under Section 397
read with Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care Protection
of Children) Act, 2015 (for brevity ‘the Act of 2015’) is against
order dated 07/12/2017 passed in Cr.A. No.340/2017, by
Additional Sessions Judge, District Rajgarh, whereby the order
dated 29/11/2017, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Rajgarh
(Biaora), dismissing the application filed by the applicant under
Section 12 of ‘The Act of 2015’, seeking his release on bail in
Criminal Case No.197/2017, registered for offence punishable
under Section 363, 366, 376 of IPC, read with Section 3/ 4of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was
affirmed.

02. As per prosecution case, on 24/10/2017, at about 9.00
pm, when the prosecutrix, went out of her house to attend nature’s
call, at that time, co-accused Dinesh, Gulab and present applicant
Rajaram committed gang rape upon her repeatedly. Thereafter
they took her to a place nearby railway station wherein they
committed gang rape upon her behind bushes. Further allegation
is that they also threatened the prosecutrix and her parents to kill
if they lodge complaint at police station. On 17/11/2017, the
prosecutrix submitted a written complaint at police station
Cr.R. No.118/2018 2

Kalipith, District Rajgarh (Biaora), on the basis of which, police
registered F.I.R bearing Crime No.197/2017 against the applicant
and co-accused persons for offence punishable under Sections
363, 366, 376 of IPC, read with Section 3/ 4of Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. During investigation,
it was found that the applicant was below the age of 18 years,
therefore, a separate charge-sheet has been filed against him
before the Juvenile Justice Board, Rajgarh.

03. In the present case, the applicant was arrested on
20/11/2017. He submitted an application for bail before the
Juvenile Justice Board, which was rejected vide order dated
29/11/2017. Being aggrieved, he preferred an appeal under
Section 101 of ‘The Act of 2015’ before learned Sessions Judge,
which came to be dismissed vide the impugned order and hence
this revision petition.

04. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that
the Courts below has committed illegality in rejecting the prayer
of the applicant for bail without complying with the provisions of
law as mentioned in Section 12 of ‘The Act of 2015’. He placed
reliance on the decision of High Court of Chhattisgarh in the case
of Raj Kumar vs. State of M.P., 2008 (I) MPWN 94, to
substantiate that the applicant should also be extended the benefit
of grant of bail under Section 12 of ‘the Act’. It is further
submitted that there is no likelihood that applicant would come
into contact of any known criminal or his release would expose
him to moral, physical or psychological danger or otherwise
defeat the ends of justice.

05. On the other hand learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the prayer contending that there is clear allegation of commission
of rape in the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Sections
Cr.R. No.118/2018 3

161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the allegation
against the applicant is of commission of rape, which involves
immoral act. Therefore both the Courts below have not
committed any illegality in rejecting the prayer of the applicant,
considering the nature of crime committed by him. The impugned
order passed by the learned appellate Court cannot be termed as
illegal or against the material available on record. Under these
circumstances, he prayed for rejection of this revision petition.

06. Considering the contentions raised by both the parties
and also perused the order and documents filed by the parties.

07. Provisions contained under Section 12 of ‘the Act’ lays
down that if a juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or
brought before the Board, such persons shall not be released if
there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is
likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or
expose him to moral physical or psychological danger, or that this
release would defeat the ends of justice, for whatsoever offence he
is charged, shall be released on bail except in the above
circumstances. Of course, bail application of juvenile can be
refused for the above grounds or any one of the grounds existed.
Thus the explanation would be that he shall not be so released, if
there appears reasonable ground for believing that the release is
likely to bring home into association with any known criminal or
expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger, or that
would defeat the ends of justice.

08. From the perusal of the record, it appears that the
application for bail of the applicant has been rejected by the
Juvenile Justice Board and on appeal dismissed by the learned
sessions Judge on the ground of seriousness of crime. Further
more on perusal of the orders passed by the two Courts, it appears
Cr.R. No.118/2018 4

that there exist reasonable grounds under the section for believing
that the release of the juvenile would defeat the ends of justice.
However, it can be lost sight of the fact that such provision is
indicative of the intend of the legislature that a child conflicted
with law should not be kept in custody normally except under the
circumstances narrated under the section 18 of ‘the Act’. The
report filed by the Probation Officer also suggested that the
applicant is not having any criminal background and is tendency
is not to indulge in crime and his release would not defeat the
ends of justice. The words “ends of justice” should be confined to
both facts, which shows that the grant of bail does not likely result
in injustice. Under these circumstances, refusal of bail would be
against the intention of ‘The Act of 2015’. Therefore, taking into
consideration of all the aforesaid facts in the opinion of this Court,
“ends of justice” would be served if the applicant be released on
bail and sent to custody of his guardian.

09. Accordingly, the present revision petition is allowed
and the order dated 29/11/2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice
Board, Rajgarh (Biaora) and the Judgment of Additional Sessions
Judge, Rajgarh dated 07/12/2017 are hereby set aside and it is
directed that the applicant shall be released on bail and handed
over to the custody of his father on furnishing a personal bond of
Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy five thousand only) with one solvent
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice
Board, Rajgarh, Biaora subject to the condition that the father of
the juvenile shall keep watch over him during the period of his
release and keep him present on each and every dates of
appearance before the Juvenile Justice Board and shall not allow
the applicant to come into association with any known/unknown
criminals and further ensure that his release shall not defeat the
Cr.R. No.118/2018 5

ends of justice in any manner. It is further directed that Probation
Officer shall periodically keep vigilance over the child conflicted
with law and observe his activities and in the event of any
diversity noticed by him he shall arrest the child conflicted with
law. Eventually, the order granting bail shall stand automatically
cancelled in view thereof.

10. Resultantly, this revision petition stands allowed and
disposed of in the manner indicated herein-above, thereby setting
aside the impugned orders.

Certified copy as per Rules.

(S. K. AWASTHI)
JUDGE
sumathi

Digitally signed by Sumati
Jagadeesan
Date: 2018.05.17 18:22:10 +05’30’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2018 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation