SANTOSH DAS Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole petitioner Santosh Das has moved this Court under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (in short " the Act") against the order dated 19.02.2016 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 02 of 2016, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for bail of the petitioner,which was rejected by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar vide order dated 18.01.2016 in G.R No. 1362 of 2015, E.N. No. 68 of 2016 instituted under Sections 302/34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 3 /4 of the Explosive Substance Act, has been affirmed.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel representing the State. The prosecution case relates to the offence under Sections 302/34, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 3 /4 of the Explosive Substance Act. It appears from the record that the petitioner was declared juvenile by a competent court and thereafter a bail petition was filed by the petitioner before the Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar, which was rejected vide order dated 18.01.2016. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal bearing Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 02 of 2016 before the Sessions Court, and the same has also been dismissed vide order dated 19.02.2016.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the courts below have failed to consider the mandate given under Section 12 of the Act wherein irrespective of the offence committed by the petitioner, bail has to be granted to a juvenile and that in a Full Bench Judgment of Hon'ble Patna High Court, the ratio has been decided that grant of bail is a rule and denial or refusal to grant bail is an exception. It was also submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 20.06.2015 and that the present revision application has been preferred by the petitioner through his natural guardian (father) Kodo Das and referring paragraph 8 of the revision application, learned counsel further submitted that parents of the petitioner will take care of the petitioner, if he is released on bail.