RAJIV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, learned Advocate for the appellant, Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, learned Advocate for the informant.

(2.) The present appeal under Sec. 101(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short 'the Act of 2015') has been filed to challenge the order dtd. 7/3/2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Childrens Court, Patna (for short 'Childrens Court') in Special (Child) Case No. 22 of 2018 arising out of Parsa Bazar P.S. Case No.73 of 2016 dtd. 30/4/2016 registered under Ss. 363 and 365 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') whereby the application filed by the appellant under Sec. 12 of the Act of 2015 for grant of bail has been rejected.

(3.) Mr. Samrendra Kumar Jha, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the Childrens Court failed to appreciate that when an application for bail to a child in conflict with law, who is being tried as an adult, is considered, the approach has to be different. He submitted that it erroneously came to the conclusion that the appellant has already fallen in bad company and, if released on bail, he may commit much graver offence after being associated in bad company. He contended that there was nothing to suggest that release of the appellant would put him in physical or psychological danger. He pleaded that while considering the bail application the court below erred to appreciate that the appellant and his father have been made accused for the reason that the daughter of the informant was having affair with the appellant. Even the alleged victim did not utter a word either in her statement recorded under Sec. 161 or 164 Cr.P.C. alleging that the appellant sexually exploited her.