RAJARAM MINOR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision preferred under Section 397 read with Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for brevity 'the Act of 2015') is against order dated 07/12/2017 passed in Cr.A. No.340/2017, by Additional Sessions Judge, District Rajgarh, whereby the order dated 29/11/2017, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Rajgarh (Biaora), dismissing the application filed by the applicant under Section 12 of 'The Act of 2015', seeking his release on bail in Criminal Case No.197/2017, registered for offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 376 of IPC, read with Section 3/ 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was affirmed.

(2.) As per prosecution case, on 24/10/2017, at about 9.00 pm, when the prosecutrix, went out of her house to attend nature's call, at that time, co-accused Dinesh, Gulab and present applicant Rajaram committed gang rape upon her repeatedly. Thereafter they took her to a place nearby railway station wherein they committed gang rape upon her behind bushes. Further allegation is that they also threatened the prosecutrix and her parents to kill if they lodge complaint at police station. On 17/11/2017, the prosecutrix submitted a written complaint at police station Kalipith, District Rajgarh (Biaora), on the basis of which, police registered F.I.R bearing Crime No.197/2017 against the applicant and co-accused persons for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC, read with Section 3/ 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. During investigation, it was found that the applicant was below the age of 18 years, therefore, a separate charge-sheet has been filed against him before the Juvenile Justice Board, Rajgarh.

(3.) In the present case, the applicant was arrested on 20/11/2017. He submitted an application for bail before the Juvenile Justice Board, which was rejected vide order dated 29/11/2017. Being aggrieved, he preferred an appeal under Section 101 of 'The Act of 2015' before learned Sessions Judge, which came to be dismissed vide the impugned order and hence this revision petition.