PRASHANT MISHRA Vs. THE STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 24.08.2015 passed by Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh, in criminal appeal No.184/2015 under Section 52 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, (hereinafter referred to in this order as the "the Act" ), whereby learned Sessions Judge had declined to grant bail to juvenile in conflict with law and release him in the custody of his mother.

(2.) The juvenile in conflict with law was admittedly 16 years old on the date of offence. As per prosecution case, at around 09.00 p.m. on 30.06.2015., victim Kailash Rajak was returning home after working in the house of mother of the juvenile. When he reached the house of Bablu Mishra, the juvenile, who appeared to be intoxicated, asked him to give Rs.50/- for buying liquor. When the complainant refused to part with money, the juvenile filthily abused him and inflicted a blow with knife on his neck, resulting in bleeding. The juvenile also threatened kill him because he was not giving him money. Vinod Rajak and Pradeep Rajak intervened and rescued the victim form the clutches of the juvenile. The victim lodged FIR against the juvenile; whereon a first information report under Sections 324, 294, 327, 506 of the IPC was registered.

(3.) The application was moved on behalf of the juvenile under Section 12 of the Act for bail, which was dismissed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Tikamgarh, observing that though, the gravity of the offence is not relevant while considering the application for bail to a juvenile in conflict with law, on the basis of report of Probation Officer, it was clear that the guardians of the juvenile do not exercise any disciplinary control over his activities. The juvenile is addicted to various kinds of intoxicants and indulges in criminal activities to raise money for aforesaid purpose. Learned Magistrate further observed that in aforesaid circumstances, if the juvenile is released on bail, he would land himself moral, physical and psychological danger; therefore, his application for bail was rejected.