Babloo Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3400 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-350 Year-2020 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== BABLOO KUMAR Son of Lal Babu Mahto @ Lalbabu Paswan R/o Mohalla - Court bazar, Ward No. 12, P.S. and District - Sitamarhi through her mother Resham Devi wife of Lal Babu Mahto @ Lalbabu Paswan, R/o Mohallacourt Bazar, Ward no. 12, P.S. and District - Sitamarhi. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, Spl. P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl. P.P. for the State.

Counsel for the appellant is directed to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a period of four weeks.

This criminal appeal has been preferred against the order dated 23.06.2021, whereby and whereunder the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Children's Court, Sitamarhi has rejected the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. case No.350 of 2020 registered for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that unknown

2/5 persons killed the nephew of the informant, namely, Raushan Kumar while he was returning from the house of informant. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that the appellant is in custody since 05.02.2021 and has got no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the appellant. The appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The appellant is not named in the F.I.R. His name has transpired in this case on the confessional statement of co-accused recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C in course of investigation. Except for this, there is no other substantive evidence to suggest the implication of the appellant in this case.

Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the mother of the appellant is ready to furnish an undertaking that while on bail, she will not allow the appellant to associate with criminals or anti-social elements. The appellant has relied upon the judgment of Lalu Kumar and Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar (reported in 2019(4) PLJR 833), where a Division Bench of this Court while considering the scope of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 in paragraph No.

"84. While interpreting Section 12, the Board is duty bound to be guided by the fundamental

3/5 principles enumerated in Section 3 of the Act of 2015, specially the principles of 'best interest', 'repatriation' and 'restoration' of child. The fundamental principles in Section 3(xii) provides that a child shall be placed in institutional care as a step of last resort after making a reasonable inquiry. The gravity and nature of the offence are immaterial for consideration of bail under the Act of 2015. As per Section 12 of the Act of 2015, an application for bail is not decided by reference to classification of offences, as bailable or nonbailable under the Cr.P.C. All persons alleged to be in conflict with law and apparently a child when apprehended must be released except in the following three circumstances when there is reasonable ground for believing that:- (i) The release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal;

(ii) The release is likely to expose the said person to moral or psychological danger; and (iii) The release would defeat the ends of justice."

Learned Spl. P.P. for the State is present and has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Social Investigation Report of the appellant was called for

4/5 from the concerned Probation Officer. The Probation Officer in his report has reported that there is no impediment in reformation of the appellant if released on bail. Further the report does not reveal that there is any material to substantiate that in the event of grant of bail, the appellant is likely to go into association of known criminals or any anti-social elements. The law requires that reasonable grounds should be there for believing that in the event of grant of bail, the appellant would go into association of any 'known criminal' or exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger or the release of the person would defeat the ends of justice. There is no reference of any known criminal nor there is any other substantive material for the conclusion as recorded by the Court below.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the findings of the Probation Officer in the Social Investigation Report of the appellant and the proposition of law as stated above, this criminal appeal is allowed and the order dated 23.06.2021 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Children's Court, Sitamarhi in Sitamarhi P.S. case No.350 of 2020 is set aside. Let the appellant, who has already been declared

5/5 juvenile by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, be released in favour of mother of the appellant on execution of surety bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) to the satisfaction of 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Children's Court, Sitamarhi in Sitamarhi P.S. case No.350 of 2020 with the condition that the mother of the appellant shall furnish an undertaking that while the appellant is on bail, she will not allow the appellant to come in company/association with any criminal or anti social elements that she will take proper care of the appellant. Further the appellant will be produced as and when required by the Court below and shall co-operate during the trial.

(Sudhir Singh, J) Narendra/- U T