Aman Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRR No. 913 of 2019 • Aman Patel S/o Shrawan Patel Aged About 16 Years Minor Represented Through Father Shrawan Patel S/o Bhojram Patel, R/o Rampur, Police Station- Kartala, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Kartala, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant : Shri Anil Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Wasim Miyan, Panel Lawyer ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Smt.Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 13.8.2019 1.

Heard on admission.

2.

The present revision has been preferred under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short 'the Act 2015') against the order dated 23.7.2019, passed in Cr. Appeal No.42/2019 by the Additional Sessions Judge(FTC), Korba, District Korba(CG), whereby the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the appeal arising out of order dated 03.7.2019, passed in connection with Crime No. 40/2019 dismissing the bail application of the present applicant by the Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, Korba, District Korba (CG).

3.

This is the revision petition filed by the accused, who is juvenile. The prosecution story in brief is that on 10.4.2019, deceased Bhaskar Pandey was returning from Kartala to his

village Kothikunda, at that time, near village Nondarha, the applicant along with co-accused stopped him, assaulted and looted Rs.1000/- from him. A case was registered as crime No. 40/2019 under Sections 397, 302/34 of the IPC and the Juvenile applicant was arrested and sent to Juvenile home. He filed application under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act for grant of bail, which was dismissed. Against the said dismissal, an appeal was preferred which was also dismissed. Hence, this revision.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the present case, the Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court below have completely ignored to consider the statutory scheme of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 which itself is pari materia of Section 12 of the Act of 2000 while considering the application for grant of bail under Section 12 of the Act of 2015. He further submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The orders passed by both the Courts below are improper and contrary to law. In view of provision contained in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. The applicant is in jail since 12.4.2019 and he has completed more than 4 months in custody, therefore, he may be extended the benefit of bail.

5.

On the other hand learned counsel for the State submits that the orders passed by both the courts below being fully justified and in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 of the Act

does not warrant any interference and the instant revision deserves to be set aside.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record.

7.

On perusal of the record, I do not find any reasonable ground having been brought before the Juvenile Justice Board or the Police Authorities in respect of the so called threat of the Juvenile getting exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger or come in the company of known criminal. 8.

In view of the above consideration, the impugned order dated 23.7.2019 could not be sustained and is therefore, set aside. The application under Section 12 of the Act of 2015 is allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail forthwith on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, by the parents or guardians of the applicant, as the case may be, to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board for his appearance before the Board, as and when directed.

9.

The revision is accordingly allowed.

Sd/ (Rajani Dubey) JUDGE sunita