SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Haider Khan Minor Thru. His Father … vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 May, 2018

Cr.R. No.119/2018 1

Cr.R. No.119/2018
(Haider Khan minor through his father vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

Indore, Dated:04/05/2018

Shri Gaurav Shrivastava, learned counsel for the
Shri Pankaj Wadhwani, learned Public Prosecutor for
the respondent/State.

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 15/12/2017 passed in Cr.A. No.317/2017, by
Additional Sessions Judge, District Agar-Malwa, whereby the
order dated 15/11/2017, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board,
Agar-Malwa, dismissing the application filed by the applicant
under Section 12 of ‘The Act of 2015’, seeking his release on bail
in Criminal Case No.583/2017, registered for offence punishable
under Section 342, 366(A), 376(2)(i), 376D, 506 of IPC, read
with Section 5(g)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 was affirmed.

02. As per prosecution case, on 01/11/2017, at about 11.00
am, when the prosecutrix, aged about 14 years, minor girl was
going to her school, on her way she met Afsar and Altaf @ Golu,
who took her to the present applicant’s house on the pretext that
Mohsina, the sister of the present applicant is calling her. When
the prosecutrix reached Mohsina’s house, the present applicant
told her that Mohsina is inside the house. The prosecutrix went
inside the house and found that Mohsina is not there, then, the
Cr.R. No.119/2018 2

present applicant and Altaf @ golu told her that Mohsina went to
Ajmer and they brought her taking the name of Mohsina.
Thereafter the prosecutrix started shouting at them. Then the
present applicant and Altaf @ Golu told co-accused Afsar that
they are standing outside the house and he can do whatever he
want to do with her. Afsar took her inside the house and
committed rape upon her. On the next day, prosecutrix went to
police station Kotwali, Agar-Malwa and submitted a written
complaint, on the basis of which, police registered F.I.R bearing
Crime No.583/2017 against Afsar, Altaf@ Golu and present
applicant-Haider for offence punishable under Sections 342,
366(A), 376(2)(i), 376D, 506 of IPC, read with Section 5(g)/6 of
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, Agar.

03. In the present case, the applicant was arrested on
04/11/2007. He submitted an application for bail before the
Juvenile Justice Board, which was rejected vide order dated
15/11/2017. 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’. The Courts
below have failed to consider the fact that no serious allegations
have been made by the prosecutrix against the applicant and there
is no iota of legal evidence available on record against the
Cr.R. No.119/2018 3

applicant. Therefore, he prayed that the applicant be extended the
benefit of grant of bail under Section 12 of ‘The Act of 2015’.

05. On the other hand learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the prayer contending that applicant is more than 16 years age
and looking to the provisions of Section 15 of ‘The Act of 2015’,
this case may be committed for trial before the regular Court,
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. Therefore, 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. On consideration of the contention of the both the
parties and from the allegations made against the applicant in
F.I.R, it is clear that although the applicant has told the co-accused
Afsar that he is standing outside and Afsar can do whatever he
want to do with the prosecutrix, however, there is no allegation
against the applicant that he has committed rape upon the
prosecutrix. The provisions contained under Section 12 of ‘The
Act of 2015’ provides 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 aforesaid grounds or any one of the
Cr.R. No.119/2018 4

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 to be 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
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 15/11/2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice
Board and the Judgment of Sessions Judge, Agar-Malwa dated
15/12/2017 are hereby set aside and it is directed that the
Cr.R. No.119/2018 5

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 only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to
the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Agar-Malwa 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 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. This order granting bail to the
applicant shall stand automatically cancelled under the following

1. If the applicant is found involved in any crime.

2. If the Juvenile Justice Board, after due enquiry,
comes to the conclusion that there is need for trial
of the applicant as an adult and transfer the trial to
the competent Court.

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

Digitally signed by Sumati Jagadeesan
Date: 2018.05.08 17:25:07 +05’30’

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation