IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.7.2009 Gujju @ Gajender. ....... Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana. ....... Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present: Shri Sandeep Chhabra,Advocate for the petitioner. .... 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? .... Mahesh Grover,J. Crl.Misc.No.33235 of 2009 The application is allowed and Annexure P3 filed along with it is taken on record. Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 This revision petition is directed against dated 15.6.2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Faridabad vide which the appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed. The petitioner is facing allegations of having sodomized a boy of five years of age leading to registration of F.I.R.No.145 dated 6.5.2009 under Section 377 of the I.P.C. at Police Station, Hodal. It has been pleaded Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 (O&M) -2- .... by him that he is a juvenile and is entitled to concession of bail pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,2000 (for short, `the Act'). It has further been pleaded that the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Faridabad has wrongly denied this concession to him vide order dated 16.5.2009 and his appeal has also been dismissed by the impugned order. While assailing the aforesaid orders, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that Section 12 of the Act directs that a juvenile who is brought before the Court to stand trial for an offence is ordinarily to be released on bail with or without surety. He further contended that the only reason why bail to such a juvenile can be declined is that he is likely to be brought him into the association with any known criminal or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. It is, therefore, his contention that the petitioner being a juvenile could not have been declined the concession of bail and since the aforesaid grounds have not been specified in the impugned order, therefore, the decision of the Principal Magistrate, as also that of the Sessions Judge are erroneous. To show prima facie that the petitioner is a juvenile, reference has been made to the certificate, Annexure P3, which has been placed on record along with Crl.Misc. No.33235 of 2009. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the impugned orders. Section 12 of the Act upon which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, is reproduced below:- Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 (O&M) -3- .... “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 or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person 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 incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in any 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 the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as may be specified in the order.” A reading of the afore-quoted provisions leaves no room for Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 (O&M) -4- .... doubt that ordinarily a juvenile is to be released on bail and the same is to be denied to him only “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.” The petitioner has been accused of subjecting a young boy of tender age to his carnal desires. The offence is, therefore, of a heinous kind and one which shocks and revolts the conscience of any right thinking person. The child, who has been subjected to the lustful designs of the petitioner will naturally keep bearing psychological scars of the unfortunate and reckless act of the petitioner. The Court, while considering the prayer for bail is, therefore, to take a holistic view of the situation while granting bail to a juvenile and similarly, while declining the same by seeing whether the case falls within the parameters of the conditions set out in Section 12 of the Act. A juvenile, who steps into the arena of criminal activities, has necessarily to be treated differently from an adult, who makes a foray into the world of crimes. That is the essence of the Act, but when the act is the one which reveals depravity of mind and gives a hint of a perverted psyche to which if no check is put, is likely to cause more harm to the society, than caused by a person, who merely inflicts physical harm to the others by violence to body, then such a person, even if a juvenile does not deserves the concession of bail. In my opinion, the release the petitioner on bail is likely to expose him to more moral and psychological pressures in life. An Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 (O&M) -5- .... offender,like this when released is likely to invoke a sniggering attitude amongst the ones who surround him and is also likely to invoke an equally hateful response from the victim's family, which may endanger him and expose him to psychological pressures and physical harm. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner for bail necessarily has to be rejected, but, at the same time, I cannot be oblivious to the provisions of Section 15 of the Act, which is as follows:- “15. Order that may be passed regarding juvenile.- (1) Where a Board is satisfied on inquiry that a juvenile has committed an offence, then, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Board may,if it so thinks fit, - (a) allow the juvenile to go home after advice or admonition following appropriate inquiry against and counselling to the parent or the guardian and the juvenile; (b) direct the juvenile to participate in group counselling and similar activities; ( c ) order the juvenile to perform community service; (d) order the parent of the juvenile or the juvenile himself to pay a fine, if he is over fourteen years of age and earns money; (e) direct the juvenile to be released on probation of good conduct and placed under the care of any parent, guardian or other fit person, on such parent, guardian or other fit person executing a bond, with or without surety, as the Board may Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 (O&M) -6- .... require, for the good behaviour and well-being of the juvenile for any period not exceeding three years; (f) direct the juvenile to be released on probation of good conduct and placed under the care of any fit institution for the good behaviour and well-being of the juvenile for any period not exceeding three years; (g) make an order directing the juvenile to be sent to a special home for a period of three years; Provided that the Board may, if it is satisfied that having regard to the nature of the offence and the circumstances of the case, it is expedient so to do, for reasons to be recorded, reduce the period of stay to such period as it thinks fit. (2) The Board shall obtain the social investigation report on juvenile either through a probation officer or a recognised voluntary organisation or otherwise, and shall take into consideration the findings of such report before passing an order. (3) Where an order under clause (d), clause (e) or clause (f) of sub-section (1) is made, the Board may, if it is of opinion that in the interests of the juvenile and of the public, it is expedient so to do, in addition make an order that the juvenile in conflict with law shall remain under the supervision of a probation officer named in the order during such period, not exceeding three years as may be specified therein, and may in such Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 (O&M) -7- .... supervision order impose such conditions as it deems necessary for the due supervision of the juvenile in conflict with law; Provided that if at any time afterwards it appears to the Board on receiving a report from the probation officer or otherwise, that the juvenile in conflict with law has not been of good behaviour during the period of supervision or that the fit institution under whose care the juvenile was placed is no longer able or willing to ensure the good behaviour and well- being of the juvenile it may, after making such inquiry as it deems fit, order the juvenile in conflict with law to be sent to a special home. (4) The Board shall while making a supervision order under sub-section (3), explain to the juvenile and the parent, guardian or other fit person or fit institution, as the case may be, under whose care the juvenile has been placed, the terms and conditions of the order and shall forthwith furnish one copy of the supervision order to the juvenile, the parent, guardian or other fit person or fit institution, as the case may be, the sureties, if any, and the probation officer.” (emphasis supplied). There is no material before this Court to show as to whether the aforesaid options have been explored by the Juvenile Justice Board in the case of the petitioner, but, certainly he deserves to be counselled by a professional psychiatrist so as to wean him away from the path that he has adopted and also to ensure that his psyche is corrected and the society is Crl.Revision No.1645 of 2009 (O&M) -8- .... saved from a possible paedophile. The instant petition is, therefore, dismissed, but with a direction to the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Faridabad to ensure that appropriate orders are passed, if not already passed, by which the petitioner is subjected to professional counselling so as to rectify his distorted thinking in order to prevent the recurrence of such act and also to prevent him from growing into a threat to the society at large. July 14,2009 ( Mahesh Grover ) “SCM” Judge