No Distinction Of Bailable & Non-Bailable Offence While Granting Bail To A Juvenile U/S 12 of JJ Act: Uttarakhand High Court

In light of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 the Uttarakhand High Court noted that any person, who is apparently a child, shall be entitled to 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.

Justice R.C. Khulbe noted that the distinction between bailable or non-bailable offense has been done away with in respect of a juvenile. He observed,

"In other words, every juvenile is entitled to be released on bail except in circumstances where his/her release will bring him/her into association with any known criminal or expose him/her to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. As per the Section 2 (12) of the Act, 'child' means a person who has not completed eighteen years of age."

A criminal revision was preferred against an order of the Juvenile Justice Board and the judgment of the Special Judge POCSO which dismissed the bail of the juvenile accused considering the gravity of the offences.

The juvenile accused, a 17-year-old, was alleged in a case under Section 304, 338, 177, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the FIR, the juvenile accused was driving the offending vehicle. On the said issue, the Court noted that it is a matter of evidence whether the case falls within the definition of Section 304A IPC of Section 304 IPC.

The Court noted that as per Section 12 of the Act, the bail can be refused if there appears reasonable ground for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any 'known criminal'. It emphasized that the Parliament has not used 'known' without purpose. By using the word 'known,' the Parliament requires that the Court know the full particulars of the criminal with whom the delinquent is likely to come into the association.

"In the case in hand, there is no such evidence on record regarding the same; both the impugned orders are silent about it; the bail of the delinquent was rejected simply on the ground that the offence is heinous in nature while Section 12 of the Act is silent about it," the Court added.

The Court thus allowed the criminal revision, setting aside the impugned order and releasing the juvenile on bail.

Case Title: Ayaan Ali v. The State of Uttarakhand

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Utt) 7

Click Here To Download The Order

Read The Order