Factors Like Nature Of Crime, Methodology Adopted Assume Significance In Denying Bail To A Juvenile: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has observed that factors such as the nature of the crime, the methodology adopted, the manner of commission, and the evidence available assume ample significance in deciding to deny bail to a juvenile.

The bench of Justice Jyotsna Sharma observed thus as it stressed that bail to a juvenile is not a must in all cases as it can be denied if, in the opinion of the Court, his release would defeat the ends of justice.

Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act

The phrase 'ends of justice' appears in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act [Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law] as one of the factors which disentitle a Juvenile to obtain bail. This provision says that a Juvenile shall not be released on bail if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that his release would defeat the ends of justice. 

For context, it may further be noted that Sec 12 of the JJ Act clearly authorizes the Juvenile Justice Board to consider a bail plea and to release a juvenile on bail with or without surety or to place them under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit person.

"The phrase ends of justice (as appearing in Sec 12 of the JJ Act) is undoubtedly a meaningful phrase bringing within its sweep many factors including the nature of the crime and the merits of the matter, though ordinarily, as has been held in number of cases, the merits of the case or the nature of the accusations are not to be considered. At the same time, there may be other facts and circumstances which cannot simply be passed over by the court concerned," the Court remarked further calrifying the true intent of the Section 12.

The case in brief

In this case, an F.I.R. was lodged by the mother of the victim with the allegations that when her 6-year-old daughter was playing outside her house, the accused juvenile, aged about 15 years, lured her on the pretext of giving toffee and took her behind a hut and committed rape on her.

Since the accused is a juvenile, the matter was brought before the Juvenile Justice Board; wherein his age was found about 12 years and 10 months in an age determination inquiry. The social investigation report was called, wherein it was observed by the District Probation Officer that the boy requires strict control and supervision. The bail to the juvenile was declined by the Juvenile Justice Board and the appeal preferred on behalf of the juvenile was also dismissed. 

Challenging both orders, the juvenile in question moved the instant revision plea before the High Court.

Court's order

At the outset, the Court opined that to give meaning to the phrase 'ends of justice', the matter of bail has to be seen literally through a prism having three angles, i.e., firstly, the angle of welfare and betterment of the child itself, i.e., the best interest of the child, secondly, the demands of justice to the victim and her family and thirdly, the concerns of society at large. 

Against this backdrop, when the Court examined the facts of the case, it observed that a girl of the very tender age of 6 years was put to violent sexual assault by a boy of merely 15 years after she was enticed in a well-planned manner by offering her sweets.

"The trauma and shock caused to an innocent girl, who had no understanding and inkling of the act with which she had to go through and the resentment which was caused to the members of her family, can easily be understood," the Court remarked as it dismissed the criminal revision plea.

Case title - Mr.X(Minor) v. State Of U.P.And Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1036 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 474

Click Here To Read/Download Order