TAIMUR (MINOR) Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist for setting aside the judgment and order dated 15.06.2018 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO/ Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No. 94 of 2018, 'Taimur v. State of Uttarakhand' whereby the order dated 11.05.2018 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar has been affirmed. It has also been prayed that the applicant/ revisionist be granted bail in Case Crime No. 417 of 2018, under Section 377 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4, 5/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at P.S. Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar.

(2.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that revisionist was arrested in connection with Case Crime No. 417 of 2018, under Section 377 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4, 5/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The revisionist moved the bail application before the learned Juvenile Justice Board; but, the same was rejected. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the judgment and orders passed by the Courts below are based on conjectures and surmises. He also submitted that the Courts below have passed the impugned judgment and orders without applying the judicial mind and also did not follow the provisions of Juvenile Justice Act for the bail of juvenile.

(3.) Section 12 (1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, provides that when any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit person: