Criminal Revision No.2682 of 2008 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Revision No.2682 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.1.2009 Jasraj Karan Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. B.S.Bhasaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. Jasraj Karan Singh @ Allu-petitioner had applied for bail on the ground that he was a juvenile in FIR No.163 dated 6.10.2008, Police Station Sadar Dhuri, under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The said application was dismissed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Sangrur vide order dated 4.11.2008. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur vide order dated 6.12.2008. Hence, the Criminal Revision No.2682 of 2008 (O&M) 2 present revision petition. Prosecution case, as noticed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur in para 6 of its order dated 6.12.2008, is reproduced herein below:- “In the instant case, FIR was registered on the basis of statement made by one Nirbhay Singh, Sarpanch of the village Bhullerheri. He had informed the police that one Sadhu Singh son of Nikka Singh, aged about 70 years was residing in their village. He had two sons and four daughters. All the daughters are married. His married son Ashok Singh had died and the family of Ashok Singh was settled at Dhuri. His younger son Bahadur Singh along with other members of the family was also settled at Dhuri. Wife of Sadhu Singh had died about two years back. Sadhu Singh was alone. He had given his land to his sons in equal share after keeping 10 bighas of land for him. Said ten bighas of land had been given on theka by him to his son Bahadur Singh which was the only source of his livelihood. On the date of occurrence, he had received a telephonic information regarding death of Sadhu Singh. When he entered the house of Sadhu Singh, from the stair case of his neighbour, he found that a gas cylinder was lying near the cot of Sadhu Singh. Ruber pipe fitted with the regulator had been cut and gas Criminal Revision No.2682 of 2008 (O&M) 3 was leaking from the said cylinder. He had switched off the regular. He found that Sadhu Singh had been strangulated with a plastic rope. Articles of his box has been searched by someone. It was stated by him that it appeared that someone killed Sadhu Singh and he wanted to set the house on fire and for that reason gas cylinder was open and even a burning candle was placed in the courtyard near the dead body of Sadhu Singh. During the investigation, police recorded the statement of Gurdas Singh, chowkidar of the village, who informed that Gurpreet Singh @ Nony grand son of Sadhu Singh along with two other boys one of whom was later on identified as appellant was seen near the house of Sadhu Singh during the late hours of the night during the day his murder was committed. They had left the house on a motor cycle. Even Bahadur Singh son of the deceased Sadhu Singh made a statement that his nephew Gurpree Singh is drug addict and he is in bad company. He had committed the murder of Sadhu Singh with the help of his companions. Even Gurdas Singh made a supplementary statement that all the three accused were drug addicts.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that admittedly the petitioner was a juvenile and was entitled to be released on bail as per the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care Criminal Revision No.2682 of 2008 (O&M) 4 and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short “the Act”). The Courts below have declined the concession of bail to the petitioner on the ground that there was a supplementary statement of Gurdas Singh on record, stating that all the three accused were drug addicts. The Court below held that since the petitioner and his companions were drug addicts and have committed the murder of Sadhu Singh in a pre- planned manner then it would not be proper to release the petitioner on bail because he would fall in bad company. As per Section 12 of the Act, a juvenile is to 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. In the present case the petitioner and his co-accused have committed murder of Sadhu Singh, who is grand father of co- accused Gurpreet Singh. As per supplementary statement of Gurdas Singh, petitioner and his co-accused are drug addicts. The petitioner, if released on bail can fall in bad company. In these circumstance, the Courts below have rightly declined the concession of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the impugned orders do not call for any interference and this revision petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE January 23, 2009 anita