ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner moved an application to seek benefit under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The initial application was rejected followed by the rejection of appeal. The petitioner preferred a revision petition before this Court, which was also rejected vide order dated 10.11.2009. After rejection of the revision petition, petitioner again preferred an application under Section 12 of the Act of 2000, which was then dismissed vide order dated 11.01.2010. The petitioner again preferred an appeal, which was also rejected, hence this revision petition.

(2.) IT is stated that at the first instance, the application under Section 12 of the Act of 2000 was moved when investigation was going on. Second application was moved at the stage when the charge sheet was filed, thus the Court below was required to look into the matter afresh. The learned Court below as well as the Appellate Court failed to look into the matter and the application was rejected mainly on the ground that there exists no change in the circumstances on filing of the charge sheet. It is stated that after filing of the charge sheet, the things become clear that petitioner did not actively participate in the occurrence, hence aforesaid aspect was required to be appreciated. In view of the aforesaid, the orders impugned herein deserve to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) THE application under Section 12 of Act of 2000 is not decided after considering the facts of the offence but looking to the statutory provisions itself. The bail to the juvenile is considered after taking note of the exceptions provided under Section 12 of the Act of 2000 i.e. release of juvenile may not defeat the ends of justice or there is likelihood that on release is likely to bring him in company of any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or physiological danger. These are the only considerations for denial of bail to the juvenile. Once such considerations are made and application is decided up to the High Court, thereafter, an application cannot be maintained again for seeking benefit of bail. It cannot be used like second or third bail application. The second and third bail application can be made with the change in the facts and circumstances because there is a consideration of the case after taking note of the facts relevant to the occurrence or the offence. The situation while considering the application under Section 12 of the Act of 2000 is quite different, thus same yard stick cannot be applied. In any case, the Court below has taken note of relevant aspect of the matter and denied benefit of bail, thus I am not inclined to interfere in the order of the Court below.