1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Crl.R.C.(MD).No.67 of 2011 T.Prabakar Mariaraj ... Petitioner / Petitioner Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police, Srirengam All Women Police Station, Trichy District. (Cr.No.47 of 2009) ... Respondent / Respondent Prayer: Petition is filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to set aside the order passed in unnumbered of 2010, dated 22.12.2010 on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Trichy and direct the concerned Court to dispose the petition on merits. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar For Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petition moved for anticipatory bail for one juvenile allegedly aged 17 years has been returned by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Trichy. The return endorsements are as follows: "1. Petitioner to state how the Anticipatory Bail application is maintainable before this Court for Juvenile. 2. Petition to be signed by the Counsel. 3. Fresh docket sheet to be attached. Hence, petition is returned. Time 10 days." Against such return, the petition has now been moved for revision. 2. Learned Counsel for petitioner placed reliance on the decision reported in 2007 Crl.L.J.3047 (Rajasthan High Court) (Jaipur Bench)in Tara Chand V State of Rajasthan, contending that the Sessions Court can exercise the power of Juvenile Justice Court and while doing so, may entertain the petition for Anticipatory Bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. On perusal of the decision relied upon, it is seen that on the one hand, it holds that Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 overrides Section 438 Cr.P.C. while on the other, it relates on Section 438 Cr.P.C. to justify entertaining a petition for anticipatory bail by the Sessions Court. The decision on the face of it is self-contradictory. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, informs the circumstances under which the Juvenile Justice Board may grant bail to a Juvenile. It requires that he should either have been arrested or detained or must have appeared or have been brought before the board. The power of grant of bail to a Juvenile under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 is exercised by the High Court or the Court of Sessions as the same stands permitted under Section 6(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. We are not able to read a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. as amounting to appearance before the Sessions Court as is done in the decision relied upon by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that the petitioner is now aged 19 years and under the circumstances, the petition moved before the Sessions Court seeking relief of anticipatory bail on claim of being a juvenile is not well founded. The question of age of the petitioner is to be decided by the lower court on merits. 5. This petition is dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Principal Sessions Judge, Trichy 2. The Inspector of Police, Srirengam All Women Police Station, Trichy District. 3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, Advocate, Sr.No.4074 Crl.R.C.(MD).No.67 of 2011 02.02.2011 ssl/avr/SMA/18.4.2011/5C/2P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/