Juvenile bail is the rule; refusal requires one of Section 12’s three statutory exceptions.

The petitioner, aged about 16 years and 8 months at the time of the alleged occurrence, sought bail in a case under Section 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The Juvenile Justice Board refused bail, and the Children’s Court affirmed that decision.

The appellate court noted that the girl was about 17 years old, that no injury or scratch marks were found, but that the possibility of sexual assault could not be ruled out. The petitioner’s father was willing to give undertakings concerning the petitioner’s conduct and welfare.

The petitioner challenged both bail orders by criminal revision.

1. Whether the refusal of bail was justified under the grounds for denying bail to a child under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015

2. Whether the petitioner should be released on bail subject to undertakings and supervision conditions

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 inconsistent bail provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure or other laws. Bail is the rule and refusal is the exception: bail may be denied only where there are reasonable grounds 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 all children in conflict with law without discrimination and that the seriousness of the alleged offence or the child’s age, including being over 16 and alleged to have committed a heinous offence, does not by itself justify denial of bail.

The lower courts’ concerns that release would bring the petitioner into contact with known criminals and send a wrong message to society did not establish a sufficient basis to deny bail under Section 12’s specified grounds.

The court also considered the father’s willingness to undertake to protect the petitioner from criminal association and moral, physical or psychological danger.

It therefore set aside the bail orders and imposed conditions addressing those risks, including parental undertakings, continued education and constructive activity, and monthly reporting to the Probation Officer.