Madhya Pradesh High Court
‘ Child Under Conflict With Law’ vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 October, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:54085
1 CRR-3519-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
ON THE 14th OF OCTOBER, 2024
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3519 of 2024
' CHILD UNDER CONFLICT WITH LAW'
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Sudeep Kumar Patel - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri N.S. Solanki - Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.
ORDER
This revision petition has been preferred under Section 397/401 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 102 of the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to
as “J.J. Act, 2015”) against the appeal judgment dated 03.06.2024 passed by
the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Mandla in Criminal Appeal
No.44/2024 of Police Station Maharajpur District Mandla (M.P.) for
commission of offence under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) of IPC, Section
5(L)/(6) of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 66E, 67B of Information
Technology Act whereby the appeal preferred against the order dated
24.05.2024 passed in Crime No.301/2024 of the aforesaid police station by
the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mandla has been dismissed
and order rejecting the bail application of the juvenile in conflict with law
has been affirmed.
2 . As per the allegations, on 22.05.2024, 16 years and almost 11
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:54085
2 CRR-3519-2024
months old prosecutrix submitted an application in writing before the Police
alleging that her date of birth is 27.06.2007 and for the last one year she was
living with her maternal grandmother. Sonu Tilgam is the neighbour of her
maternal grandmother. They came into contact with each other and started
chatting and talking with each other on phone and video call for the last one
year. It is alleged that on 18.09.2023, when her mother had gone in
neighbourhood for performing Pooja and she was alone at home, Sonu
Tilgam came and told that he loved her and committed rape upon her. He
also used to say that he loves her but she did not love him and if she loves
him then she has to take off her clothes. Sonu took her photographs through
video call and thereafter he started to blackmail her saying that he will send
her photographs to her parents. It was further alleged that on 07.05.2024
Sonu took her towards agriculture field situated road side and committed
rape/aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her. On 17.05.2024 Sonu
from his mobile forwarded her obscene photographs on her father’s mobile.
Her parents after watching photographs enquired from her. FIR was
registered. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed before the
Juvenile Justice Board.
3. Juvenile in conflict with law was apprehended on 23.05.2024.
Blood samples were taken for DNA examination. DNA report has been
received but the same is inconclusive.
4 . At the time of commission of offence, applicant was found to be 16
years and 03 months old. Social Investigation Report was called wherein it
was observed by the Probationary Officer that juvenile in conflict is in bad
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:54085
3 CRR-3519-2024
company. He has no repentance for his act. It was also observed that he has
committed heinous offence related to woman. No description was given
about his family background. Probationary Officer has nowhere mentioned
that if juvenile is released on bail, he may come into association of known
criminals. He has also not mentioned any incident on the basis of which, it
may be said that he is in bad company or he is a previous offender. Learned
Juvenile Justice Board has observed that if juvenile in conflict with law is
released on bail, 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 will defeat the ends of justice. No other offence except the
present one is registered against him.
5 . An Application under Section 12 of the J.J. Act for grant of bail to
juvenile was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board, but same was declined.
Thereafter, an appeal preferred on behalf of juvenile was also dismissed.
Learned Additional Sessions Judge taking into account the fact that the
offence is serious one and he has committed aggravated penetrative sexual
assault upon a girl below the age of 17 years, therefore he was of the view
that his release is likely to bring him into association with any known
criminal, or expose him to moral, physical, or psychological danger, and that
his release will defeat the ends of justice and dismissed the appeal.
6 . Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that at the time of
commission of offence, juvenile was only 16 years and 03 months old while
girl was older to him as at the time of commission of offence she was 16
years and more than 10 months old. It is submitted that applicant and victim
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:54085
4 CRR-3519-2024
both are juvenile and belong to tribal community and they out of curiosity
consensually established physical relations and juvenile girl herself exposed
her body before the juvenile and asked him to take photographs, but when
matter came into the knowledge of her parents, a report has been lodged and
juvenile has been falsely implicated. It is also submitted that juvenile in
conflict has no criminal background. Therefore, report of Probationary
Officer that he is in bad company, is malicious and unfounded.
7. There is nothing on record to show that if juvenile is released on
bail, 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 will defeat the ends of justice. No such findings were recorded as
to how he will come in contact with known criminals and how he will be
exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger. There is no mention in
the report that juvenile in conflict with law family has any criminal
background. Juvenile’s parents are ready to give an undertaking that if
juvenile is released on bail, they will keep him in their custody. It has been
further submitted that Juvenile Justice Board as well as Appellate Court have
not properly appreciated the facts of the case and have passed impugned
orders in a cursory manner without considering the object of the law enacted
for the benefit of the Juvenile and have refused to release the applicant on
bail.
8 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has supported the
impugned appeal judgment and order passed by the J.J.Board and has
contended that juvenile has committed an offence of rape/aggravated
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:54085
5 CRR-3519-2024
penetrative sexual assault which show his deprivation of mind. Therefore, it
has been prayed that considering the gravity of offence, present criminal
revision filed on behalf of the juvenile may be dismissed.
9. I have heard rival submissions put-forth by learned counsel for the
parties.
10. It is undisputed that at the time of commission of offence, applicant
was 16 years and 03 months old while the girl was older to him as she was
more than 16 years and 10 months old. Learned Juvenile Justice Board and
learned Additional Sessions Judge/Children Court have taken into
consideration the gravity of crime committed by the juvenile. They have
also taken note of the report of Probationary Officer. It is settled position of
law that gravity of offence alone cannot be a ground to reject the bail
application. As per the Probationary Officer report, juvenile in conflict with
law is in bad company but he has not given any single example to infer that
he is in bad company. He has no criminal background. Thus, in Probationary
Officer’s report there is nothing, on the basis of which any adverse inference
may be drawn against him.
11. Before considering the legality, correctness and propriety of the
order passed by the Courts below, it would be useful to look at the relevant
provision of the Act. Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 reads as under:
“12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged
to be in conflict with law.-
(1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is
alleged to have committed a bailable or nonbailable
offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or
appears or brought before a Board, such person shall,Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:540856 CRR-3519-2024
notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other
law for the time being in force, be released on bail with
or without surety or placed under the supervision of a
probation officer or under the care of any fit person:
Provided that such person shall not be so released if
there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the
release is likely to bring that person into association
with any known criminal or expose the said person to
moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s
release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board
shall record the reasons for denying the bail and
circumstances that led to such a decision.
(2) When such person having been apprehended is not
released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-
charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the
person to be kept only in an observation home in such
manner as may be prescribed until the person can
brought before a Board.
(3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-
section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending
him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the
case may be, for such period during the pendency of the
inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the
order.
(4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfill
the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail
order, such child shall be produced before the Board for
modification of the conditions of bail.”
12. Provisions of Section 12 of “J.J. Act, 2015” manifest that
ordinarily, the Juvenile Justice Board is under obligation to release the
juvenile on bail with or without surety. The juvenile shall not be released in
certain circumstances as the latter part of the section also uses the word
‘shall’ imposing certain mandatory conditions prohibiting the release of the
juvenile by the J.J. Board. If there are any reasonable grounds for believing;
(a) that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:54085
7 CRR-3519-2024
criminal; (b) that release is likely to expose him to moral, physical, or
psychological danger and (c) that release of the juvenile is in conflict with
law and would defeat the ends of justice.
13. From a bare reading of the provisions of Section 12 of “J.J. Act,
2015”, it appears that the intention of the legislature is to grant bail to the
juvenile irrespective of the nature or gravity of the offence alleged to have
been committed by the juvenile, and bail can be declined only in such cases
where there are reasonable grounds to believe that the release is likely to
bring the juvenile into an association of any known criminal or expose him to
moral, physical, or psychological danger, or that his release would defeat the
ends of justice. The gravity of the offence is not a relevant consideration for
declining the bail to the juvenile. A juvenile can be denied the concession of
bail if any of the three contingencies specified under Section 12(1) of “J.J.
Act, 2015” is available.
14. In case of ” Narayan Sharma Vs. State of MP ILR (2012) MP
796 a Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering the provision of the
Section 12 of the Act observed as under:-
“In the opinion of this court, the Juvenile Justice Board
may be justified in denying bail to a juvenile involved
in a heinous crime only if there is material before it to
form a prima facie opinion on the aspects carved out as
exception to rule of bail in section 12 of the Act itself.
There must be some mechanism with the Juvenile
Justice Board to gather material and form an opinion as
to whether the juvenile need to be denied bail by
bringing his case under the exceptions to bail engrafted
in Section 12. The opinion to be formed by the Board,
by no means, can be subjective and has to be objective.
Either the prosecution should place some prima facieSignature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:540858 CRR-3519-2024
material before the Board or the Court to show that
release of a juvenile on bail may expose him to moral,
physical or psychological danger of the Board may
obtain a report from the Probation Officer attached to
the Board regarding antecedents and circumstances
attended to the juvenile, both pre and post crime and it
is only thereafter the Board or the Court should
crystallized its opinion regarding release or non release
of the juvenile on bail, though involved in a heinous
crime. A reference to the statutory provisions governing
bail to a juvenile contained in section 12 would show
that there is a mandate of law that the juvenile has to be
released on bail, except only in those cases where the
case fall in one or the other exception engrafted by the
legislature in section 12 itself.”
15. It has been observed in Pratap Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand &
another 2005 SCC (Criminal) 742, that:-
“the whole object of the Act is to provide for the care,
protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation of
neglected delinquent juveniles. It is a beneficial
legislation aimed at to make available the benefit of the
Act to the neglected or delinquent juveniles. It is settled
law that the interpretation of the Statute of beneficial
legislation must be to advance the cause of legislation
to the benefit for whom it is made and not to frustrate
the intendment of the legislation.
16. Further it has been observed in Sanjay Chaurasia Vs. State of U.P.
and another 2006 (55) ACC 480 that:-
“10. In case of the refusal of the bail, some reasonable
grounds for believing above mentioned xx exceptions
must be brought before the court concerned by the
prosecution but in the present case, no such ground for
believing any of the above mentioned exception has
been brought by the prosecution before the Juvenile
Justice Board and appellate court. The appellate court
dismissed the appeal only on the presumption that dueSignature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:540859 CRR-3519-2024
to commission of this offence, the father and other
relatives of other kidnapped boy had developed enmity
with the revisionist, that is why in case of his release,
the physical and mental life of the revisionist will be in
danger and his release will defeat the ends of justice but
substantial to this presumption no material has been
brought before the appellate court and the same has not
been discussed and only on the basis of the
presumption, Juvenile Justice Board has refused the bail
of the revisionist which is in the present case is
unjustified and against the spirit of the Act.”
17. Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in case of Karan Vs. State of
MP in Cr.R. No. 5159/2018 decided on 14.01.2019 and Girdhar Vs. State of
MP in Cr.R. No. 509/2021 decided on 17.03.2021 has held that the bail
application of a child in conflict with the law cannot be rejected merely on
the ground of seriousness of the crime. The only exception to grant of bail to
a child in conflict with the law is the reasonable ground for believing that
release would bring him into association with any known criminal or expose
him to moral, physical or psychological danger or his release would defeat
the ends of justice.
18. Section 13(1)(ii) of “JJ Act, 2015” provides that the Probation
Officer shall submit a social investigation report within two weeks from
when a child is apprehended or brought to the Board, containing information
regarding the antecedents and family background of the child and other
material circumstances likely to be of assistance to the Board for making the
inquiry. The “social investigation report” which has been defined in Rule
2(xvii) of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model
Rules, 2016, means the report of a child containing detailed information
pertaining to the circumstances of the child, the situation of the child on
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:54085
10 CRR-3519-2024
economic, social, psycho-social and other relevant factors, and the
recommendation thereon. This report becomes important for the inquiry to
be done by the Board while passing such orders in relation to such a child as
it deems fit under Sections 17 and 18 of this Act. The purpose behind this
provision is to enable the Juvenile Justice Board to get a glimpse of the
social circumstances of the child before any order regarding bail or of any
other nature is passed.
19. ‘Form-6’ of the Model Rules, 2016, contains a detailed proforma of
the social investigation report. The social investigation report submitted by
Probation Officer and Child Welfare Officer and it is incumbent upon the
juvenile Justice Board to take into consideration the social investigation
report and make an objective assessment on the reasonable grounds for
rejecting the bail application of the juvenile.
20. In this case, FIR has been registered on the basis of complaint
made in writing. The allegation against the present applicant/juvenile in
conflict with law is that he forwarded an obscene photograph of the girl child
on her parents mobile phone and when parents watched that photograph, they
enquired from the girl and only then FIR has been lodged. It cannot be
overlooked that applicant is younger to the girl and girl has not lodged any
FIR of the relationship after commission of offence. It has been lodged only
after forwarding of the photograph. Applicant has no criminal background.
Therefore, I am of the view that considering the overall facts, the view taken
by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as appellate Court in the impugned
judgments and order dismissing the applications for giving the Juvenile on
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:54085
11 CRR-3519-2024
Supurdagi have not properly appreciated the mandatory provisions of
Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015 as well as other provisions in relation to
juvenile and have declined to grant bail merely on the basis of unfounded
apprehension and gravity of offence. In the absence of any material or
evidence with reasonable grounds it cannot be said that his release would
defeat the ends of justice. Thus, it is explicit that Juvenile Justice Board and
appellate Court both have not recorded the findings on the three
contingencies for declining the bail to the juvenile. Therefore, I am of the
considered view that the order dated 24.05.2024, passed by the learned
Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mandla in Crime No.301/2024
and appeal judgment dated 03.06.2024, passed in Criminal Appeal
No.44/2024 by the Appellate Court are not sustainable. Hence, the above
orders are set aside and present criminal revision filed on behalf of juvenile
is allowed as juvenile’s father is ready to take care of the juvenile.
21. It is directed that juvenile in conflict with the law be released on
bail in Crime No.301/2024 dated 22.05.2024 of Police Station Maharajpur,
District Mandla for commission of offence under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) of
IPC, Section 5(L)/(6) of POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 66E, 67B of
Information Technology Act upon furnishing a personal bond of his father of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties of his
relatives in the amount of the Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only)
each to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Mandla subject to the
following conditions:-
(1) During bail period, applicant/juvenile will remain in their
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:5408512 CRR-3519-2024
supervision and control and they shall be responsible for his maintenance,
well being and other activities.
(2) His father shall undertake that upon release on bail juvenile will
not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known criminal or
allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical, or psychological danger and
further that he will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.
(3) Juvenile will report to the Probation Officer on the every last date
of the calendar month and Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the
activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report
that would be submitted to the J.J. Board, on such a periodical basis as the
Juvenile Justice Board may need it.
(4) Juvenile’s father shall also ensure of the appearance of the Juvenile
before J.J. Board on all the dates fixed by it till the final disposal of the case
pending before it.
22. This criminal revision is allowed accordingly.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)
JUDGE
DV
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DINESH VERMA
Signing time: 11/6/2024
9:58:43 AM