BHALIYA JAYANTIBHAI RAVJIBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the juvenile in conflict with law on produced before the Juvenile Justice Board, Vadodara in connection with FIR no. 11197059220396/2022 of Jarod Police Station, Vadodara Rural for the offence under Ss. 143 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 302 , 323 , 506(2) , 504 , 34 of the IPC, his bail application came to be rejected, against that, he through his parents filed Criminal Appeal before the Children's Court under Sec. 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act , 2015 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), which came to be rejected and has filed the Revision Application challenging the propriety and legality of the order passed by both the authorities. This Court had an occasion to deal with the bail application of a child in conflict with law and while granting bail, this Court had an occasion to deal with the provisions of Sec. 12 of the Act and had explicitly laid down that Sec. 439 of the Cr.P.C. would not be applicable on the issue of grant or denial of bail to a child alleged to have committed bailable or non-bailable offence which is dealt with by the special statute i.e. Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act , 2015, which contains specific provision for bail under Sec. 12 of the Act. In the case of Child in Conflict with Page 2 of 16 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 20 20:44:53 IST 2023 R/CR.RA/398/2023 ORDER DATED: 18/ 04/2023 Law Through Savitaben Vitthalbhai Vasava v. State of Gujarat , 2022 (0) AIJEL-HC 244005 (passed in CRRA no.901 of 2021 on 28/4/2022), it has been observed as under:-

(2.) Mr. Shaival Patel, learned advocate for the applicant stated that J.J. Board as well as the Children's Court have failed to take into consideration the probation officer's report which is to be perused while considering the application under Sec. 12 of the Act. Mr. Patel submitted that in all there are 6 juveniles and 5 have been granted bail by this Court and further stated that in the bail order of 5 juveniles in conflict with law, this Court, after perusing the probation officer's report, had granted bail. Mr. Patel submitted that probation officer's report would clarify the fact that of the necessity of the present juvenile in conflict with law to keep with him a knife. Mr. Patel stated that as per the report, the juvenile was in romantic relations with the niece of the deceased and thus, the deceased was often threatening him and was creating an atmosphere of fear. As per the report, the applicant had discontinued his relations with the niece of the deceased. Still however, the deceased was threatening him and therefore, for his own safety, juvenile in conflict with law was holding the knife. Mr. Patel submitted that on the day when the incident took place, there was a dispute between 2 class of the village and all the 10 accused have been alleged to have played specific role of injuring the deceased and the allegation against the present applicant is of giving a knife blow on the chest and abdomen of the deceased.

(3.) Advocate Mr. Pathan who has been appointed from Gujarat High Court Legal Service Authority on behalf of the complainant submitted that the very act of the juvenile of inflicting the deceased the knife blow suggest the criminal mind of the juvenile and stated that if at all he is released on bail, then he may continue with his illegal activities and would create an atmosphere of fear in the village and thus, stated that no bail should be granted.