15-Year-Old In POCSO Case Gets Bail As Jharkhand HC Says Offence’s Gravity Alone Cannot Keep A Juvenile In Custody

The petitioner, a juvenile aged about 15 years and 10 months at the time of the alleged incident, was accused of taking the victim girl to Surat, from where they returned after three days.

The victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS indicated that she and the petitioner were in love; the Social Investigation Report was not adverse, and the petitioner had no criminal antecedents.

The Juvenile Justice Board rejected his bail application, and the appellate court affirmed that decision, relying on the gravity of the allegation.

The petitioner sought revision of both orders.

Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 governs bail for a child alleged to be in conflict with law and overrides the bail provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and other laws for the time being in force.

Bail is the rule; refusal is permitted only where reasonable grounds exist to believe that release is likely to bring the child into association with a known criminal, expose the child to moral, physical or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice.

The Court stated that Section 12 applies to juveniles without a classification based on the nature or gravity of the offence.

The lower courts rejected bail on the gravity of the allegation, but the Court found that they had not addressed the statutory grounds under Section 12.

The Social Investigation Report was not adverse, the petitioner had no criminal antecedents, and the record disclosed no material establishing reasonable grounds for any of the three statutory exceptions.

The father’s willingness to provide undertakings and supervise the petitioner further supported release subject to conditions.

It directed the petitioner’s release on bail upon his father furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to undertakings concerning supervision, education and protection from harmful associations, as well as monthly reporting to the Probation Officer and monitoring by that officer.

The revision petition was disposed of accordingly.