[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 258/2008 KUMARI REKHA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN DATE: 25.04.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Jairaj Tantia for the accused-petitioner. Mr. B.S. Chhaba, Public Prosecutor for the State. **** The present criminal revision petition under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short 'the Act of 2000') is preferred by the accused- petitioner against the order impugned dated 12.12.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur in Criminal Appeal No. 160/2007 and against the order dated 03.12.2007 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Bharatpur in FIR No. 480/2007 registered at Police Station Kaman, District Bharatpur for the offences under Sections 143, 302, 379 and 396 IPC, whereby the bail application moved on behalf of the accused- petitioner under Section 12 of the Act of 2000 has been dismissed. In brief the facts of the case are that on 04.11.2007 the petitioner lodged a report at Police Station Kaman, District Bharatpur, upon which FIR No. 480/2007 came to be registered for the offences under Sections 143, 302, 379 and 396 IPC. During [2] investigation, on 12.11.2007 the investigating agency recorded the confessional statement of the petitioner Kumari Rekha and she was arrested and produced before the learned Magistrate. As the petitioner is juvenile, she submitted a letter before the Juvenile Justice Board and narrated the correct story. In her application before the Board, she has specifically stated that her two minor brothers have been murdered by Satish Punjabi and Vinod, who had also subjected her to rape. She also stated that she had narrated all the facts to the police but the police had put undue pressure upon her and her family. On 18.11.2007, the petitioner represented before the higher authorities for fair investigation in the matter and had also filed a misc. petition before this Court seeking same relief. Since the petitioner is a juvenile, she moved an application under Section 12 of the Act of 2000 to release her on bail but the same was dismissed by the Principle Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Bharatpur vide order impugned dated 03.12.2007. Thereafter the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 52 of the Act of 2000 but the same has also been dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur vide order impugned dated 12.12.2007. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the orders impugned dated 03.12.2007 and 12.12.2007, the petitioner has preferred the instant criminal [3] revision petition. Both the Courts below refused to grant bail to the accused-petitioners looking to the seriousness and nature of the offence. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner referred Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short 'the Act of 2000') which deals with bail of juvenile and the same reads as under:- 12. Bail of Juvenile.- (1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety but he shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub- section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during [4] the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as may be specified in the order. As per sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act of 2000, if any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety but he shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. So far as reasonable grounds for any physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that there is no such report submitted and upon perusal of the order impugned by which bail has been refused to the petitioner, it has been observed that there is quite apprehension that the petitioner can come into the contact of the accused if released on bail, therefore, bail was refused to the petitioner. [5] Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner also referred the report of Deputy Director, Social Justice Department, Bharatpur, wherein it has been stated that no other criminal case is pending against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his submissions placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Mata @ Manohar Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in RLW 1996(1) Raj. 372, wherein dealing with the Juvenile Justice Act it has been observed that revision should be under Section 38 of the Act- Section 18- Provision for bail- Both the lower courts refused bail to the delinquent juvenile on the ground of nature and seriousness of the offence- The procedure for bail granted in the Act is extraordinary- Act is curative and reformative-- The grounds refusing bail are hardly relevant in such cases- Section 18 explained- revision allowed and bail granted with conditions. He further placed reliance on the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Imtiyaz Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2005(2) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1197, wherein this Court has held that at the time of consideration of bail, merit or nature of offence has no relevancy- Word used 'shall' in Section 12 is mandatory- Intention of legislature is clear to grant bail to delinquent- Report of [6] probation officer show that his sister was abducted, petitioner got enraged and fired one gun shot- death of one person- no bad antecedent of the petitioner is found- offence under Section 302- bail granted. While dealing with Section 12 of the Act of 2000 in the case of Imtiyaz (supra), it was observed that a delinquent juvenile ordinarily has to be released on bail irrespective of nature of offence alleged to have been committed by him, unless it is shown by evidence that if he is released on bail, there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release of delinquent juvenile is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. I have heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the provisions of Section 12 of the Act of 2000 and the judgments referred before me. I have also perused the report of Deputy Director, Social Justice Department, Bharatpur. Now the only crucial aspect is to be seen whether on release of the petitioner on bail, as observed by the Courts below that her release will likely to bring her into association with any known criminal or expose her to moral, physical or [7] psychological danger or that her release would defeat the ends of justice, I deem it proper to remand the matter back to the Court below to reconsider these aspects and the observations which are made and the accused-petitioner is given liberty to move application under Section 12 of the Act of 2000 afresh before the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Bharatpur and the Principal Magistrate shall give the reasoning as to on what basis observations are made that in case the accused-petitioner is released on bail, her release would likely to bring her into association with any known criminal or expose her to moral, physical or psychological danger or that her release would defeat the ends of justice and after giving the reasons shall consider the bail application of the accused-petitioner afresh and shall pass fresh order. With these observations, the present criminal revision petition stands disposed of and the order impugned dated 12.12.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur and the order impugned dated 03.12.2007 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Bharatpur are hereby quashed and set-aside. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/ [8]