Juvenile Cannot Be Denied Bail Without Recording Finding That Proviso To S. 12(1) Juvenile Justice Act Is Applicable: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (August 14) granted bail to a juvenile who had been in custody for over a year, noting that the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), trial court, and the Rajasthan High Court failed to record a specific finding that the proviso to section 12(1) Juvenile Justice Act is applicable to the case.

Section 12(1) of the JJ Act mandates that a juvenile in conflict with the law should be released on bail, with or without surety. As per the proviso to this section, such a person shall not be released if there are reasonable grounds to believe that release would lead to the juvenile associating with known criminals, expose the juvenile to moral, physical, or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice.

“From the phraseology used in sub-section 1 of Section 12, a juvenile in conflict with law has to be necessarily released on bail with or without surety or placed under supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person unless proviso is applicable”, the Court observed.

After dictating the order, Justice Abhay Oka remarked, “Something has to be done, how can one year a juvenile be detained like this? Anyway, he will get freedom tomorrow on Independence Day.”

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and justice Augustine George Masih highlighted that the JJB, trial court, and the HC had all failed to record any findings that would justify the application of this proviso to deny bail.

“There is no finding recorded that the proviso to sub-Section 1 of Section 12 is applicable to the facts of the case. Without recording the said finding, bail could not have been denied to juvenile in conflict with law…Though none of the courts at no stage have recorded a finding that in the facts of the case, the proviso to sub Section 1 of Section 12 was applicable, the juvenile in conflict with law has been denied bail for last one year”, the Court observed in its order.

The juvenile has been charged under Sections 354 and 506 of the IPC as well as Sections 9 and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.

The juvenile was taken into custody on August 15, 2023, and placed in a Juvenile Care Home. A charge sheet was filed on August 25, 2023. On August 23, 2023, the juvenile's application for bail under Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act), was rejected. JJB rejected a subsequent bail application on December 11, 2023.

The Special Judge under the POCSO Act dismissed appeals against orders of the JJB, and the HC also dismissed the challenge to the Special Court's decision, leading to the present appeal before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court also relied on a Psychological Assessment Report of the juvenile, which indicated that the juvenile did not belong to a high-risk category and had no significant concerns.

Given the lack of any findings supporting the application of the proviso under Section 12(1) of the JJ Act, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned orders and allowed the appeal. The Court ordered the immediate release of the juvenile on bail without surety and directed the JJB to issue appropriate instructions to the Probation Officer to keep the juvenile under supervision and to submit periodic reports on the juvenile's conduct to the JJB.

Case no. – Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 9566/2024

Case Title – Juvenile in Conflict with Law V v. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 582