VISHAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revision petition has been filed by Vishal, a juvenile in conflict with law, challenging the order dated 04.02.2020 whereby his third application for grant of bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for brevity "the Act") was declined by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Rohtak and order dated 06.03.2020 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak vide which his appeal filed against the said order was dismissed.

(2.) In brief, FIR was registered at Police Station IMT Rohtak on the statement of Vinod son of Sant Ram. It was alleged that on 20.09.2019, the complainant was on duty when his father called him at 3.30 p.m. and told him to come home. After about one hour, the complainant reached his street. When his father Sant Ram was talking to him outside his house, petitioner, his father, Sunil and his brother Akash who was carrying a stick, came there and started hitting the complainant and his father. Sunil hit the complainant from behind with a stick and all three of them also hit his father with it. Both the complainant and his father went to PGIMS Rohtak for treatment. It was alleged that Sunil threatened that he will kill both the complainant and his father. Initially, FIR No.261 was lodged under Sections 323, 34 and 506 IPC on 21.09.2019 at 4.41 a.m and four days later i.e on 25.09.2019, after the death of the father of the complainant, Sections 325 and 302 IPC were added. The petitioner was arrested on 01.10.2019 and is in custody since then.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued by placing reliance upon Section 12 of the Act that the petitioner being a juvenile, is entitled to bail as a matter of right. It has been urged by the counsel that there was a delay of 12 hours in the registration of FIR and that no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner and the name of petitioner has been mentioned in the FIR because he was a family member of the alleged aggressors. It has been submitted that the petitioner was a student and his studies have been disrupted as a result of his arrest. The grandfather of the petitioner has undertaken that the petitioner will maintain good conduct in future.