Allahabad High Court
JUVENILE X MINORversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL
Holding
Under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, bail must be granted to a juvenile unless reasonable grounds exist that release would associate him with known criminals or expose him to danger, and such grounds were absent in this case.
Summary
The appellant, a juvenile aged 17 years 6 months at the time of the alleged offences, appealed the denial of bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The High Court examined whether the lower court had correctly applied the statutory presumption in favour of bail for juveniles and whether any reasonable grounds existed to deny release, such as association with known criminals or exposure to danger. The court found no material indicating the juvenile’s involvement with criminal elements and held that the lower courts had dealt with the matter in a cursory, mechanical manner. Consequently, the appellate court set aside the earlier order and granted bail, subject to conditions imposed on the legal guardian. The decision underscores the overriding effect of the JJ Act over the Code of Criminal Procedure in juvenile bail matters.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be denied to a juvenile under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act in the absence of reasonable grounds of association with criminals or danger.
- Whether the lower court’s denial of bail was perverse or illegal under the statutory framework.
- Whether the juvenile’s age, lack of criminal history, and family background warrant the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- juvenile justice
- bail
- Section 12
- juvenile offender
- protective legislation
- criminal procedure
- observation home
- legal guardian
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9836 of 2025
Juvenile X Minor
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Bhavana Dubey, Sarvesh Kumar Dubey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Deepak Dubey, G.A.
Court No. - 93
HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant- Juvenile X Minor s/o
Late Arjun Singh through his legal guardian/mother Maheshwari Devi under
Section 101(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,
2015 against the judgment and order dated 16.09.2025 passed by learned
Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Session Judge, Etawah, in Bail
Application No. 1915 of 2025 (Juvenile X Vs. State), arising out of Case
Crime No.182 of 2020 under Sections 323, 302, 307, 427, 452, 325, 504,
506 I.P.C., Police Station- Basrehar, District- Etawah, by which, the bail
application of the appellant was dismissed by the Special Court.
2. Heard Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant and
Sri Deepak Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this juvenile bail
application has been filed on behalf of the applicant through his legal
guardian (mother). Learned counsel for appellant in support of his prayer for
bail submits that the impugned order of the court below is illegal and
perverse. The court below has not appreciated the evidence available on
record in proper perspective. The applicant is quite innocent. The informant
due to party politics and to exploit the career of applicant rope the applicant
in the false case. The applicant has no criminal history and if the applicant is
released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. It is further submitted
that the appellant has already undergone more than 5 years and 5 months of
incarceration out of the total sentence awarded. Learned counsel further
submits that similar placed co-accused Dharamveer @ Neetu and Guddu @
Karamveer have been enlarged on bail.
CRLA No. 9836 of 2025
2
4. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer
made by the learned counsel for the appellant and submitted that if the
appellant is released on bail, he will join in the company of habitual crime,
hence he is not entitled for bail.
5. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 (Act) has been
enacted with object to reform and protect the future career of children below
the age of 18 years. The main purpose of this Act is to keep the juvenile out
of company and society of habitual criminals and to keep them in place of
safety. The parameter and guidelines for assessment of plea of bail of a
juvenile has been provided in Section 12 of the Act which is as under:-
"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 of 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.
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 an observation home in the prescribed
manner until he can be brought before a Board.
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."
6. Thus it is clear that the provision for release to a juvenile has overriding
effect to any provision contained in Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or in
any other law for the time being in force. According to this provision, a duty
has been cost to grant bail to a juvenile unless there is a reasonable ground
for plea that the release is likely to bring the juvenile into association with
any known criminal or exposed the said juvenile to moral, physical or
psychological danger or that his release would defeat the end of justice.
CRLA No. 9836 of 2025
3
7. Plea of bail raised by juvenile cannot be rejected in a mechanical manner.
While considering the parameter provided in Section 12 of the Act, nature of
offence, role played by the juvenile in committing the offence, his family
background, his association with known or unknown criminals or bad
elements of society, number of person named in the occurrence and future
carrier of juvenile should also be taken into consideration by Juvenile Justice
Board or court concerned in addition to the other factors.
8. In this case the appellant was aged about 17 years 6 months and 4 days at
the time of occurrence. Admittedly the appellant was juvenile at the time of
occurrence. No material is available on record whereby it can be presumed
that the appellant was in association of any criminal or bad elements.
9. From perusal of impugned judgement and order passed by the appellate
Court as well as passed by the Board, it transpires that both the Courts below
have passed the impugned judgement and orders in cursory manner. The
impugned judgment and order is liable to be set aside.
10. Consequently, the appeal succeeds and is allowed. The impugned
judgment and order dated 16.09.2025 is hereby set aside.
11. Let the appellant-X Minor s/o Late Arjun Singh through his legal
guardian/mother Maheshwari Devi be released on bail in the aforesaid
criminal case and be given into her custody on furnishing a personal bond
with two solvent sureties of her relatives each in like amount to the
satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board concerned on the following conditions.
(i)That, legal guardian/ Maheshwari Devi (mother) of the appellant will
furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail, the juvenile will not be
permitted to go into contact or association with any known or unknown
criminal or exposed to any moral or physical danger and will not indulge in
any criminal activity and he will make best effort for improvement of
juvenile's carrier.
(ii)That the appellant and his legal guardian/ Maheshwari Devi (mother)
shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either
personally or through his counsel.
April 3, 2026
P. Pandey
(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
PUSHPENDRA PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…