JUVENILE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By preferring this application under Sec. 102 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, the applicant has prayed for following relief:

(2.) Notice is duly served to the respondent No.2 as per the endorsement made by the learned Additional Sessions Court, Surat. Today when the matter was called out, none has appeared to contest this application on behalf of the respondent No.2. It also appears from the record that signature of the respondent No.2 was also taken by the concerned police officer of Katodara Police station, Surat for serving the notice.

(3.) Mr. Suraj A. Shukla, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that there is no prima facie case made out against the juvenile and he has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the alleged offence is not at all committed by the juvenile herein and as per the allegations in the FIR, the investigating officer has miserably failed to prove the presence of the juvenile in the entire charge-sheet. That the entire incident is based on circumstantial evidence and the witness relied upon by the prosecution are hearsay witnesses and therefore, it shall be considered that the juvenile is arrested only on the basis of suspicion and has no nexus with the alleged incident in any manner. Hence, it was requested by the learned advocate for the applicant to enlarge the present applicant on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions.