MANMOHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner (juvenile- through his natural guardian father Peera Ram S/o Nimba Ram ) as well as learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent- State and counsel for the respondent No.2-complainant.

(2.) The allegation against the petitioner is of offence under Sections 302, 341, 323/34 IPC. The bail application filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of the Act of 2015 before Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Nagaur was rejected vide order dated 14.02.2019. Being aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed by the petitioner before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Nagaur and the same has been dismissed by learned Appellate Court vide impugned order dated 21.02.2019. Being aggrieved of the orders dated 14.02.2019 and 21.02.2019 passed by the Courts below, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition before this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is below 18 years of age and he has been falsely involved in the case without any material evidence. It is further submitted that on perusal of the challan paper, it would reveal that the witnesses namely Surendra, Bhagirath, Suresh and some other witnesses, specifically named the co-accused Sahiram and Ghisaram, who inflicted injury on the head of the deceased whereas the present petitioner Manmohan has not inflicted any injury to the deceased and according to the postmortem report, the cause of death is head injury. 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 them 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.