AMANDEP SINGH ALIAS AMNA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this revision petition, challenge has been made to the order dated 16-12-2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge. Shri Ganganagar, dismissing the appeal filed by the Petitioner against the order dated 13-12-2010 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate. Juvenile Justice Board. Shri Ganganagar in FIR No. 167/2010 under Sections 447, 302. IPC registered at Police Station Rawla, District Shri Ganganagar.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 20-7-2010, complainant Rani Kaur lodged a FIR at the Police Station Rawla to the effect that on 19-7-2010, her husband Dan Singh slept in the field to guard the crops. In the morning of 20-7-2010 at about 6.00 a.m. when she went to the field to give tea to her husband, she saw that her husband was lying dead on the cot covered with blood. He had sustained injuries by some sharp weapon on his neck, face, chest, and fingers of left hand. On the aforesaid report, police registered FIR No. 167/2010 under Sections 447, 302. IPC and commenced investigation. During the course of investigation, present Petitioner Amandeep Singh alias Amna was detained in the above FIR. Since the Petitioner was minor, therefore, an application under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 was filed on behalf of Petitioner Amandeep Singh alias Amna for grant of bail before the Juvenile Justice Board. Shri Ganganagar. The application was rejected after hearing both the sides by the learned Principal Magistrate. Juvenile Justice Board. Shri Ganganagar vide order dated 13-12-2010 on the ground that present case is of henious nature pending against the Petitioner and the bail application as well as appeal of the co-accused Rinku had already been rejected. Petitioner then preferred appeal under Section 52 of the Act before the District and Sessions Judge, Shri Ganganagar. who by order dated 16-12-2010 dismissed the appeal and maintained the order of rejection of bail for Amandeep Singh alias Amna.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the gravity of the offence committed cannot be a ground to decline the bail to juvenile. He further contended that the Courts below without taking into consideration the mandatory provisions of the Act. in a cursory manner declined bail to the Petitioner. He further contended that the orders of the Courts below are not based on definite facts and they are based on surmises and conjectures.