BIPUL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner (juvenile) as well as learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

(2.) The allegation against the petitioner is of offence under Sec. 103 (1), 238(A) and 3(5) of BNS . The bail application filed by the petitioner under Sec. 483 BNS S has been rejected by the learned Judge, Children Court, Bikaner vide order dtd. 2/4/2025. Being aggrieved of the order dtd. 2/4/2025 passed by the Court below, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition before this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that petitioner was below 18 years of age at the time of incident. He has been falsely involved in the case without any material evidence. It is argued that learned Court below has not appreciated the fact that the petitioner is juvenile and entitled to get benefit of provisions of the Act of 2015. The petitioner is in custody since long time and no further detention of the petitioner is required for any purpose. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the gravity of the offence committed cannot be a ground to decline bail to a juvenile. It is also argued that nothing adverse has been brought on record in the report of the Probation officer. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Juvenile in conflict with law v. State of Raj . (Criminal Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 9566/2024) dtd. 14/08/2024, CCL A v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 DHC 3061 , Child in Conflict with law v. State of Gujarat , 2022 GUJHC 19582 and X v. State of Uttarakhand , (2024) 261 AIC 883 .