"How Many More Nirbhayas' Sacrifice Needed To Shake Lawmakers' Conscience?": MP High Court Denies Bail To 15-Yr-Old Boy In Rape Case

The Madhya Pradesh High Court denied Bail to a 15-year-old juvenile who has been accused of committing rape of a minor girl aged around 10-11 years old whereby she was left bleeding for a prolonged period of time.

The Bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed that an offence of rape, being carnal in nature, cannot be committed unless a person has the specific knowledge of the same and refused to agree with the observation made by the Probationary Officer that an offence of rape can be committed due to ignorance.

Importantly, the Court observed that since the age of a child was still kept below 16 years in heinous offences under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act of 2015, it gives a free hand to the delinquents under the age of 16 years to commit heinous offences.

Referring to the instant case, the Court observed that despite committing a heinous offence, the petitioner would be tried as a juvenile only, because he is less than 16 years old as provided under Section 15 Act of 2015.

Significantly, the Court further added:

"Apparently, the present law to deal with such cases is totally inadequate and ill-equipped and this Court really wonders as to how many more Nirbhayas' sacrifice would be required to shake the conscious of the lawmakers of this Country"

The matter before the Court

The Court was hearing a criminal revision filed by a 15-year-old boy under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 challenging the order of Sessions Judge, Jhabua, District Jhabua (MP), whereby the appellate Court had dismissed his appeal and had confirmed the order passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board under Section 12 of the Act of 2015, refusing to grant him bail.

The Juvenile had been accused of committing offence under Sections 342, 376 (2) (n), 506 and 376 (a) (b) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also under Section 5 (m) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012.

Court's observations

The Court took into account the relevant medical documents and it did not find it to be a fit case to exercise its discretion to release the petitioner on bail.

The Court observed that the petitioner, though aged 15 years only, has committed a heinous offence of rape on a minor girl aged around 10 years and 4 months, which left her bleeding so profusely that her blood transfusion was also required and as per her statement, the petitioner also committed the same act around 3 days ago as well.

"The conduct of the petitioner clearly reveals that he committed the aforesaid offence with full consciousness and it cannot be said that it was committed in ignorance," added the Court.

Lastly, the Court opined that if the petitioner would be again left to the care of his parents, considering their earlier negligence to harness him, it cannot be said that the girls of tender age around him would be safe and secure especially when he is enjoying the protection of Juvenile Justice Act.

The Court also ordered that the copy of the order be sent to the Law Secretary, Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi (India). 

Case title - Sunil s/o Budiya Parmar (Juvenile) through guardian (Father) Budiya s/o Kidiya Parmar Versus The State of Madhya Pradesh

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order