DEEPAK @ RAJA Vs. STATE; STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that petitioner is below 18 years of age he has been falsely involved in the case without any material evidence. Further there is no evidence to show that if the juvenile-petitioner is released on bail, then his release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal, or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger, or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. It is argued that learned Courts below have not appreciated the fact that the petitioner is juvenile and entitled to get benefit of provisions of the Act of 2015. Section 12 of the Act of 2015 clearly provides that if the accused is juvenile, then he should be released on bail, but learned Courts below fully ignored the 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. Learned Courts below in quite cursory manner have declined bail to the applicant-petitioner.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor defended the impugned order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board in declining the bail to the petitioner as also the judgment passed by the Appellate Court upholding the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board.