AJAM (JUVENILE) Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revisionist in the present revision is a juvenile in conflicting with law. He is involved in the Case Crime No. 66 of 2017, under Sections 376 of I.P.C. and Sec. 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, Police Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar.

(2.) It has been alleged in the FIR that the revisionist committed a sexual offence with a twelve years old sister of the complainant and hence the First Information Report has been filed against him under the aforesaid sections. The revisionist, being a juvenile, moved a bail application before the Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar, which was rejected vide order dated 05.04.2017. Aggrieved by the said order, the revisionist preferred an appeal before the learned Special Judge POCSO/Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar, which was also rejected vide order dated 29.04.2017.

(3.) In view of this Court both the courts below have not appreciated the provision of law, which ought to have considered while considering the bail application of a juvenile. The bail application of a juvenile has to be considered in view of Sec. 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which reads as under:-