IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
CRIMINAL REVISION NO.24 OF 2006
Joker S/o Madan Pal Singh
R/o Village Teliwala @ Rasulpur
P.S. Jwalapur District Haridwar
State of Uttarakhand
Dated: December 22, 2008
None is present for the revisionist. Sri Harish Pujari, learned Addl. G.A. for the State.
HON. DHARAM VEER, J.
This criminal revision, preferred under section 397/401 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.) read with Section 53 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children Act, 2000), (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) is directed against the order dated 17.2.2006 passed by In- charge Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No.24/2006 and the order dated 25.1.2006 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar.
2. List has been revised. None is present for the revisionist. I have heard Sri Harish Pujari, learned Addl. GA for the State and perused the entire material available on record.
3. In brief, the facts of the case are that the revisionist-Joker was the accused in case crime no.490/2005 u/s 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as IPC), Police Station Jwalapur, District Haridwar and he has been declared juvenile by the Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar on 18.1.2006. On 2
the basis of juvenile, he moved the bail application before the Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar, which was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar on 25.1.2006. Against the said order dated 25.1.2006, the revisionist preferred the appeal before the Sessions Judge, Haridwar, which was also dismissed by the In-charge Sessions Judge, Haridwar on 17.2.2006. Against the said orders dated 25.1.2006 and 17.2.2006, revisionist has come up in revision before this Court.
4. In-charge Sessions Judge, Haridwar and the Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar have rejected the bail application of the revisionist on the ground that if the accused shall be released on bail there appear 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 his release would defeat the ends of justice. Learned In- charge Sessions Judge and Juvenile Justice Board have not stated any reason on the basis of which both the courts below have come to above-stated conclusion. For just decision of the case, Section 12(1) of the Act is reproduced below:-
"12.Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being is force, be released on bail with or without surety but he shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring 3
him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice".
5. It is needless to say that the revisionist has been released on bail by the order of this Court on 28.02.2006. Hence, the only prayer made by the revisionist in the revision has already been allowed on 28.02.2006.
6. For the reasons recorded above, order dated 25.1.2006 of the Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar and order dated 17.2.2006 of the In-charge Sessions Judge, Haridwar, are set aside. The revision is disposed of accordingly.
(Dharam Veer, J.)