{"id":2020,"date":"2024-06-26T16:01:23","date_gmt":"2024-06-26T10:31:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/?p=2020"},"modified":"2024-06-26T16:01:23","modified_gmt":"2024-06-26T10:31:23","slug":"madhya-pradesh-hc-holds-that-bail-to-juvenile-ignoring-societal-concerns-not-must-in-all-cases","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/madhya-pradesh-hc-holds-that-bail-to-juvenile-ignoring-societal-concerns-not-must-in-all-cases\/","title":{"rendered":"Madhya Pradesh HC holds that bail to juvenile ignoring societal concerns not \u2018must\u2019 in all cases"},"content":{"rendered":"

CHILD UNDER CONFLICT WITH LAW\u00a0 [<\/strong>APPLICANT]\u00a0 Vs.\u00a0 <\/strong>THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH\u00a0 \u00a0[<\/strong>RESPONDENT]<\/h1>\n

CRIMINAL REVISION NO.1300\/2024<\/p>\n

(HON\u2019BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL<\/strong>)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Facts:<\/u><\/strong> This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “J.J. Act”) against the appeal judgment dated 09.02.2024 passed by Sessions Judge, Chhindwara arising out of Crime No.283\/2023 of P.S. Damua, District Chhindwara for commission of offences of Indian Penal Code whereby appeal has been dismissed and the order dated 29.01.2024, passed by the Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Chhindwara rejecting the bail application of child in conflict with law has been affirmed.<\/p>\n

Issue:<\/u><\/strong> Whether the present appeal is maintainable?<\/p>\n

Arguments on behalf of counsel for applicant:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that at the time of commission of offence juvenile was 16 years and 1 month old. He has no criminal antecedent. He has been falsely implicated without any material evidence. It is further submitted that juvenile was compelled to confess the offence by giving beating while in custody. It is further submitted that there is no evidence on record that if the juvenile is released on bail, his release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal, expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger and would defeat the ends of justice.<\/p>\n

Arguments on behalf of counsel for respondent:<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the State has supported the impugned judgment and order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate Court and has contended that that the juvenile has committed a heinous offence in a pre-planned manner as after kidnapping the boy he demanded the ransom by sending message on the mobile phone of the father of the deceased from the same mobile which was with the deceased. It is further submitted that the dead body of the deceased minor boy has been seized on the basis of disclosure of the fact by the juvenile in conflict with law. He has murdered the minor boy only because father of the deceased could not manage the ransom of Rs.20.00 lac.<\/p>\n

Held:<\/u><\/strong> The court dismissed the present appeal and held that, \u201caim of the Juvenile Justice Act is to take care of both child in conflict with law as well as the society. As such, Section 12 of the Act cannot be interpreted in a manner so as to give advantage to only juvenile in conflict with law ignoring the concern of the society. The provisions of bail for juvenile cannot be interpreted to work only for the benefit of the juvenile ignoring the cries of the family of the deceased child. Whenever child becomes victim of offences, let alone heinous offence like rape\/aggravated penetrative sexual assault, murder, society craves and cries for justice. By showing misplaced sympathy to a juvenile, who kidnapped a minor child for ransom and later on murdered him due to non payment of desired ransom the society is denied justice which is not and cannot be intention of law.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

CHILD UNDER CONFLICT WITH LAW\u00a0 [APPLICANT]\u00a0 Vs.\u00a0 THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH\u00a0 \u00a0[RESPONDENT] CRIMINAL REVISION NO.1300\/2024 (HON\u2019BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL)   Facts: This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “J.J. Act”) against the appeal judgment dated […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2023,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2020","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-judgement"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2020","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2020"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2020\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2024,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2020\/revisions\/2024"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2023"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2020"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2020"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2020"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}