AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as also learned Public Prosecutor.
This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 09.02.2018 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Alwar, whereby the appeal filed by the
accused-petitioner Pawan Kumar under Section 101 of Juvenile Justice Act has been rejected.
Counsel for the petitioner contends that his appeal has been rejected only on the ground that the possibility of the accused-petitioner Pawan Kumar of
coming into association with known criminals or to expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger cannot be ruled out on his coming into
contact with co-accused.
Counsel submits that this apprehension expressed by the learned Sessions Judge is without any substance. He has further contended that gravity of
nature of the offence is not the relevant factor while deciding the appeal filed under the provision of Juvenile Justice Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that observations made by the court below about the apprehension of the juvenile coming in conduct with
other criminal elements and to expose to some psychological or criminal danger, who is just contrary to the report received from Probation Officer,
Alwar. The Probation Officer has stated in his report that the conduct of the juvenile is satisfactory and there is no criminal antecedents of juvenile.
His father is a teacher in Government School and settled family in the village.
Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer.
From perusal of Section 12(1) of the Act of 2000, it is clear that a delinquent juvenile ordinarily has to be released on bail irrespective of nature of
offence alleged to have been committed by him unless it is shown by evidence that if he is released on bail, there appears reasonable grounds for
believing that the release of the delinquent juvenile is likely to bring him into association with any known criminals or expose him to moral, physical or
psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. The nature of offence and the merits of the case do not have any relevance.
It is for the prosecution to bring on record such material while opposing the bail and make out any of the grounds provided in the section, which may
persuade the Court not release the juvenile on bail. But in this case, there is nothing on record to show that the release of the petitioner is likely to
bring him into association with any known criminal or expose to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of
justice.
In view of the report filed by the Probation Officer, Alwar nothing has come on record which can suggest that the juvenile will again come into
contact with known criminal or will be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger. The Juvenile is stated to be detained in the observation
home since the report of the Probation Officer.
In view of whatever is stated above, the revision petition deserves to be allowed. It is directed that if the father of the accused-petitioner furnishes a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Court, Alwar then the accused-
petitioner Pawan Kumar be released on bail.
The revision petition stands allowed.