1. This is a criminal revision under section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of children) Act 2000 (in short 'the Juvenile Act') against the judgement and order dated 22.7.2010 passed by Mr. H.K. Dubey, the Sessions Judge, Basti in Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No. 56 of 2010 (Ravi Gaur alias Ravinder Gaur vs. State of U.P.), whereby the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the revisionist's appeal and maintained the order dated 15.4.2010 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Basti, on the bail prayer of the revisionist in the case crime no. 57/2008, under section 302 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Basti.
2. Heard Mr. Jagdish Prasad Tripathi and Ms. Urmila Tripathi for the revisionist and the learned AGA for the respondent no.1 and perused the record.
3. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present revision is being disposed of at the stage of admission.
4. It is not in dispute that the revisionist has already been declared as a juvenile by the Juvenile Justice Board, Basti vide the order dated 1.5.2008. It is also not disputed that the revisionist moved the first bail application before the Juvenile Justice Board, Basti, which was rejected vide the order dated 5.6.2008. Against that rejection order, the criminal appeal no. 61/2008 was preferred in the court of the Sessions Judge, Basti,which was dismissed on 19.7.2008. Thereafter the revisionist preferred criminal revision no. 2585 of 2008 in this court which was dismissed by Hon'ble Ram Autar Singh, J. on 22.1.2010.
5. The first bail application was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board on the ground that the applicant's release was likely to expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger and also would defeat the ends of justice. The revisional court as well as this Court was of the same view. The second bail application has been moved mainly on the ground that the co-accused Rajneesh Chaudhary, at whose instance the razor was recovered, has already been released on bail by this Court vide the order dated 13.10.2009 passed in criminal misc. bail application no.24942/2009. The co-accused was released on bail on the ground that there was no direct evidence against him and the alleged recovery was made after about fifteen days of the occurrence and he had no criminal antecedents.
6. The learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the revisionist, who has now become major, can not be kept in jail for an indefinite period only because he was a juvenile on the date of the occurrence. When the accused from whom recovery of the weapon had been made, has already been enlarged on bail, there is no reason to deny the bail to the revisionist. This changed circumstance appeared after rejection of the first bail application by the Juvenile Justice Board and the Sessions Judge. No doubt the co-accused has been released on bail before disposal of the previous revision filed by the revisionist in this Court but at that time the revisionist had no knowledge that the co-accused had already been enlarged on bail, therefore, the factum of grant of bail to the co-accused could not be pointed out at the time of hearing on the previous revision.
7. It may not be out of context to mention that the bail matter of a non-juvenile is dealt with according to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in that matter the provisions of the Juvenile Act are not applicable. The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure with regard to bail matters relating to a murder cases are more stringent than the provisions of section 12 of the Juvenile Act. Under section 12 of the Juvenile Act merit of the case has no relevance for the bail purposes of a juvenile. A juvenile is entitled to bail under section 12 of the of the Juvenile Act as of right unless it is shown that his release on bail is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or exposed to him to moral, physical and psychological danger and his release would defeat the ends of justice. If any of these conditions exists, a juvenile can not be released on bail. While considering these three conditions the Juvenile Justice Board or the court dealing with the bail matter has to consider the facts and circumstances of the case and to see whether or not there is adequate materials to substantiate any of the aforesaid conditions. If there is no evidence or material regarding existence of any of the aforesaid three conditions, the bail prayer of a juvenile can not be refused only on the basis of conjectures and surmises or on imaginary grounds. When the accused from whom recovery has been made is enjoying the benefit of bail, there shall be no justification to deny bail to the revisionist. In other words, in this matter a liberal approach has to be adopted.
8. It may not be out of context to mention that the revisionist was juvenile on the date of occurrence but has now become major, therefore, there is no reasonable basis to hold that he would be misguided by somebody else so as to expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger. It may further be mentioned that none of the courts below was of the view that the applicant had any criminal history. In this view of the matter, there is hardly any scope to arrive at the conclusion that revisionist's release on bail is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger.
9. In view of the fact that the co-accused has already been released on bail, it would be appropriate and just to extend the same benefit to the revisionist, therefore, his release would not defeat the ends of justice, rather would serve the purpose of justice.
10. Keeping in view the changed facts and circumstances of the case narrated above, the second bail prayer of the revisionist moved before the Juvenile Justice Board, Basti is liable to be allowed.
11. The revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 22.7.2010 passed by the Sessions Judge, Basti as well as the order dated 15.4.2010 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Basti, are hereby quashed.
12. Let the revisionist Ravi Gaur Alias Ravindra Kumar Gaur be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Basti.
Order Date :- 28.10.2010 RKSh