Holding

Bail to a child in conflict with law must be granted under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, and Section 439 of the CrPC is inapplicable.

Summary

The father of a child in conflict with law (CCL) filed a revision application under Section 102 read with Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, challenging the Additional Sessions Judge's handling of a regular bail application for an offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The High Court examined whether bail for a CCL must be decided under Section 12 of the JJ Act rather than under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Relying on the Probation Officer’s report and prior jurisprudence, the Court held that the special provision in Section 12, with its non‑obstante clause, excludes the application of Section 439 CrPC. Consequently, the Court allowed the revision, granting bail on a personal bond of Rs.10,000 with surety and ordering the Probation Officer to monitor the child. The order also directed quarterly reports and provision of any needed therapeutic support.

Issues considered

The applicability of Section 439 CrPC to bail applications filed by a child in conflict with law.
Whether the bail application should be entertained under Section 12 of the JJ Act, 2015.
The necessity of a Probation Officer’s report before granting bail to a CCL.
The procedural correctness of the Additional Sessions Judge’s handling of the bail application.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023s. 103(1), s. 3(5)
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 437, s. 439
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015s. 101, s. 102, s. 12, s. 15, s. 18

Subjects

Juvenile JusticeBailSection 12 JJ ActSection 439 CrPCChild in Conflict with LawProbation OfficerHeinous offenceRevision application

Judgment

R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 2538
of 2025

==========================================================
CHILD IN CONFLICT WITH LAW THROUGH HIS FATHER – RAMSETH
AMARYA BHOSALE
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JAYDEEP H SINDHI(9585) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

Date : 13/04/2026

ORDER

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of the

respondent – State.

2. The Child in Conflict with Law (hereinafter referred to as

“CCL”), through his father, has filed an application under

Section 102 read with Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care

and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to

as “JJ Act”) challenging the order dated 14.11.2025 passed by

the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Valsad under the

heading of Criminal Misc. Application (for regular bail) no. 701

of 2025 in connection with FIR bearing CR no.

11200048250436 of 2025 registered with Vapi Town Police

Page 1 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

Station, District Valsad for the offence punishable under

Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,

and to release CCL on regular bail. It does not become clear

by the status record of the learned Judge as Additional

Sessions Judge, Valsad whether the Court is a Children’s

Court as per the JJ Act. However, assuming the same as an

Additional Court, then, it was required for the learned

Additional Sessions Judge to have considered an application

as an appeal under Section 101 of the JJ Act. The learned

Trial Court Judge has entertained the application as if it is a

regular bail application.

3. The facts of the case, as have been brought to the notice, are

that one eye-witness – Prashant, son of Ganesh Shivram

Chauhan informed the police about the deceased aged about

40-45 years who was a beggar. When eye-witness – Prashant

was inquired by the police, he has stated that on 4.3.2025, he

had gone into Memu train at 3 O' Clock in the afternoon for

purchasing balloons at Surat and while returning from Surat,

Zampa Bazar purchasing the balloons at about 7 in the

evening in the express train from Vapi Railway Station since

his mother and sister were staying at the open land in front of

Sahara Market Building at Imrannagar, he had joined them

Page 2 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

during the night, when he was resting and watching his

phone, at that time, at night at about 10 O' Clock, he saw one

CCL no.2, aged about 13 years 8 months and CCL no.3, aged

about 16 years 11 months 2 days were taking lame and

bearded man on the open land besides the nursery and the

present CCL was having stick in his hand and he was following

them. According to the eye-witness, all the three wanted the

lame and bearded man to beg and when he had refused to do

so, his clothes were removed and was beaten with stick and

stones on both the limbs and his legs were fractured.

According to the eye-witness, because of that injury, the

injured died.

4. The facts of the case suggest that the deceased was himself

was a beggar. The complainant appears to be the person who

was also sleeping in the open area along with mother and

sister. He only could have seen the CCL nos. 2 and 3 taking

the lame and bearded person towards the open land besides

the nursery and according to him, the present CCL was

following them with a stick. The facts do not suggest that the

witness – Prashant is an eye-witness to the incident. The facts

and circumstances under which the offence got committed

does prima facie suggest that the witness had seen the

Page 3 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

incident. The complainant – Jivla son of Gavjibhai Kurkutiya is

the security guard and he is not the eye-witness to the

incident. The facts do not become clear under what

circumstances and why CCLs were with the deceased aged

about 40 to 45 years whose even full name and place of

residence is also not clear on the record, the police has failed

to find the residence of the deceased.

5. The JJ Board as well as the Appellate Court have not even

taken into consideration the Probation Officer’s report to find

out the actual facts from the side of the CCL. According to the

Probation Officer, after conversing with the sister and the

father of the CCL, this was the first incident. The CCL has

studied upto Std.8 at Village Nasik and had come for the

Shivratri festival at the house of his sister at Vapi. The

Probation Officer has also referred that he has not found of

any bad habits of the child and CCL had been suffering from

mental illness because of his accident, which he suffered 3-5

years ago.

6. Mr. Bhargav Pandya, learned APP has referred to the reports

of the Police Inspector as well as Probation Officer to submit

that the bail rejection is just and proper.

Page 4 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

7. The JJ Board as well as the Children’s Court, while considering

the bail application of the CCL under Section 12 of the JJ Act,

was required to call for the report of the Probation Officer to

examine under what circumstances, the offence came to be

committed when all the CCLs have been alleged to have

caused the death of an adult, aged about 40-45 years who

was alleged to be a beggar. The cause, as has been shown by

the eye-witness – Prashant, also becomes doubtful in that

circumstances.

8. This Court had an occasion to deal with the bail application of

a CCL and while granting bail, this Court had an occasion to

deal with the provisions of Section 12 of the Act and had

explicitly laid down that Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. would not

be applicable on the issue of grant or denial of bail to a child

alleged to have committed bailable or non-bailable offence

which is dealt with by the special statute i.e. Juvenile Justice

(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which contains

specific provision for bail under Section 12 of the Act. In the

case of Child in Conflict with Law Through Savitaben

Vitthalbhai Vasava v. State of Gujarat, 2022 (0) AIJEL-HC

244005 (passed in CRRA no.901 of 2021 on 28.04.2022), it

has been observed as under:-

Page 5 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

“15. Explanation to Section 15 of the JJ Act,
2015 stipulates that in case of a heinous
offence alleged to have been committed by a
child, who has completed or is above the age
of sixteen years, the Board shall conduct a
preliminary assessment with regard to his
mental and physical capacity to commit such
offence, ability to understand the consequence
of the offence and the circumstances in which
he allegedly committed the offence and then
may pass an order in accordance with the
provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 18.
Thus, the whole endeavour of the JJ Act, 2015
is to protect a child in conflict with law from the
path of destruction and being a menace to the
Society. The object is reformative and not
retributive.

16. Now, under these circumstances upon
preliminary assessment made by the JJ Board
under Section 15(2) of the JJ Act, 2015 and
when the need is found for the trial of the child
as an adult and his case is ordered to be
transferred to the Children’s Court, the
relevant consideration would be whether the
child in conflict with law de-jure become an
adult to be treated as a child in the subsequent
proceedings and thus the question would be
whether the application for bail would be
maintainable in the High Court under Section
439 for the child in conflict with law, who is
sent for trial before the Children’s Court or
whether the application for bail should be
considered under Section 12 of the JJ Act.

17. Section 12 of the JJ Act, 2015 which
deals with the grant of bail to a child expressly
contains the nonobstante phrase to be as “....
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 ...”. This very provision in
Section 12 clarifies that provisions of Cr.PC is
excluded in the case of bail plea of the child.

Page 6 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

Further, it requires to be noted that Section 12
is a specific provision under the special statute
that deals with the matter of bail and
accordingly, the application of Section 439 of
the Cr.PC is also necessarily excluded. Cr.PC
contains a corresponding clause which is for
application on special lines. Considering this
aspect in case of a bail application on behalf a
child, it would be required to be concluded that
such bail plea would not be maintable under
Section 439 of Cr.PC.

18. The order under Section 18(3) of the JJ
Act transferring the trial of the case to the
Children’s Court would not declare the child as
an adult. Child in conflict with law is defined
under Section 2(13) of the JJ Act, 2015 to
mean a child who has not completed 18 years
as on date of the commission of the offence.

19. Non-applicability of Section 439 of Cr.PC
in case of child in conflict with law has been
appreciated by various High Courts. This Court
would like to refer to the decision of the High
Court of Delhi in the case of CCL ‘A’ v. State
(NCT of Delhi) in Bail Application No.2510/2020
(dated 19.10.2020), where the Court had
observed as under :-

“44. In formulating the above position, this
court finds support in the view taken by the
Division Bench of the Chhattisgarh High Court
in Tejram Nagrachi Juvenile vs. State of
Chhattisgarh Through the Station House
Officer4, where the Division Bench has opined
that an application for grant of bail under
section 437 Cr.P.C. or 439 Cr.P.C. would not be
maintainable in the case of a juvenile. The
relevant paras of the judgment are as under:

"7. A conjoint analysis of the provisions
contained in Sections 437 and 439 of the Code
viz a viz Sections 8, 10 and 12 of the Act, 2015
would discern that while there are certain
general guidelines under Sections 437 & 439 of

Page 7 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

the Code, power in respect of grant of bail to a
juvenile is more liberal in the nature of
command under Section 12(1) that whenever
an apparent juvenile alleged to have
committed a bailable or non-bailable offence is
detained by the police or appears or brought
before a Board, such person shall,
notwithstanding anything contained in the
Code 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
person. The only rider for not releasing the
apparent juvenile is that whenever there
appears reasonable grounds for believing that
the release is likely to bring that person
(Juvenile) into association with any known
criminal or expose the said person to moral,
physical or psychological danger or his release
would defeat the ends of justice, the Board
shall record the reasons for denying the bail
and circumstances that led to such a decision.
This rider as contained in proviso to Section
12(1) requires the Board to record reasons for
denying the bail. It would mean that ordinarily
the bail is to be allowed to a juvenile. The
denial being exceptional on certain reasons to
be recorded by the Board as provided in the
proviso. This special provision is not contained
under Section 439 of the Code.

"8. .......... While there is no denial of the fact
that when the Court of Sessions exercises
appellate power under Section 101(2) and the
High Court exercises revisional power under
Section 102 of the Act of 2015, it shall exercise
power of the Board provided under Section
8(2), but this power of the Board would also be
available to the Court of Sessions or to the
High Court when it proceeds to examine the
plea of juvenile for grant of bail whenever such
occasion arises on account of bail application of
juvenile being rejected under Section 12 of the
Act of 2015. Therefore, by use of the term
"otherwise" in Section 8(2), jurisdiction under

Page 8 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

Section 439 of the Code would not be attracted
which is otherwise excluded by use of the term
"notwithstanding anything contained in the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)
or in any other law for the time being in force",
as occurring in Section 12 (1)." (emphasis
supplied)

20. The law therefore, is clear on the aspect
that since Section 12 of the JJ Act bears a non-
obstante clause which indicates legislative
intent that the source of power to grant bail
under the JJ Act, 2015 is independent from
that of the Cr.PC. Thus, it can be said to be
concluded that Section 439 of the Cr.PC is not
applicable on the issue of grant or denial of bail
to a child alleged to have committed bailable or
non-bailable offence who is to be dealt with by
the Special Statute, i.e. JJ Act, 2015 which
contains the specific provision for bail under
Section 12 of JJ Act, 2015.”

9. In this background of the matter having observed the

Probation Officer’s report, the present application is allowed.

The Child in Conflict with Law is ordered to be released on bail

in connection with the FIR bearing CR no. 11200048250436 of

2025 registered with Vapi Town Police Station, District Valsad

on the applicant’s father executing a personal bond in sum of

Rs.10,000/- each (Rupees ten thousand only) with surety of

like amount before the Children’s Court with a condition to

that he would take care of his child for his good behaviour

and his well being.

Page 9 of 10
R/CR.RA/2538/2025 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

10. It is directed that the Probation Officer shall monitor the

conduct of the CCL and shall quarterly submit the report

before the concerned Board/Children’s Court till completion of

the trial. Moreover, if the Probation Officer considers any

necessity of sending the CCL for any behaviour modification,

then necessary therapy and psychiatric support be provided

to the CCL.

11. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Direct service is

permitted.

(GITA GOPI,J)
Maulik

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MAULIK RAJESH PANDYA(HC00205), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 13/04/2026 17:05:03

Page 10 of 10