SHOKAT ALI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this bail application u/ S. 439, Cr. P.C. for his release in criminal case FIR No. 196/1991. The accusation against the petitioner is that, Charas weighing 7 grms. and 500 Ml. grms. were recovered from his possession on Sept. 12, 1991. A report of the incided was lodged at P.S. Kunhadi-Kota by Sh. Mohan Singh, S.H.O. On the said report, Crime No. 196/91 u/ Ss. 8/ 20 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1988 was registered. In the report, the age of the petitioner has been given as 17 years.

(2.) The petitioner moved an application for grant of his bail under Section 439, Cr. P.C. before the Sessions Judge, Kota, but his application was rejected on the ground that as per medical report, the age of the petitioner is between 14 to 15 years, as such, he is a child within the definition of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), as such, the order of bail cannot be passed by any Court constituted under the Code of Criminal Procedure. In other words, the, learned Sessions Judge was of the view that in spite of the fact that thin accused is a child, the bail can be granted by a Juvenile Court and no other Court. Therefore, a short question arises for determination as to whether Court other than a juvenile Court constituted under the Act has jurisdiction to pass an order of bail even it is satisfied that the accused is a child. In this connection, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no bar either under the Code of Criminal Procedure or under the Act taking away the jurisdiction of a Court constituted under the Code of Criminal Procedure restricting its power to release a child on bail if it is satisfied that the accused is a child under the Act and there is nothing on the record to show reasonable grounds for believing that his release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. The learned counsel further argued that this Court has been granting bail to the juvenile offenders in exercise of its powers either u/ S. 437 or 439, Cr. P.C. The learned counsel further drew my attention to Section 33 of the N.D.P.S. Act which empowers a Court to release the accused on probation, who is below the age of 18 years.

(3.) In order to appreciate the above argument, it is necessary to refer certain relevant provisions of the Act. The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 has been enacted to provide for care, protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation of neglected or delinquent juveniles and for the adjudication of certain matters relating to and disposition, delinquent juveniles. It is not disputed before me that the said Act has come into force. Section 2 of the said Act deals with certain definitions, 'Delinquent Juvenile' has been defined u/ S. 2(e) of the Act as a juvenile who is found to have committed an offence. 'Competent Authority' has been defined under Section 2 (d) of the Act reads as under:-