Bail Is The Rule For Juveniles Even If Tried As Adults; Gravity Of Offence No Ground To Deny Bail Under Juvenile Justice Act

 

The Rajasthan High Court reaffirmed that bail under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 must be treated as the default position for a juvenile in conflict with law, and that the seriousness or gravity of the alleged offence cannot by itself constitute a valid basis for denying bail under the provisions of the Act. In a case where a juvenile petitioner’s bail application had been rejected by both the Children’s Court and a lower appellate court, the High Court heard a revision petition challenging those orders. The petitioner, who had been sent to the Children’s Court to be tried as an adult under the statutory exception in the Act following a preliminary assessment, sought bail under Section 12 of the Act. On hearing submissions, the bench of the High Court closely examined the language and legislative intent of Section 12 and held that, under the statutory framework, bail to a juvenile is fundamentally a rule and denial of bail is an exception to be applied only in clearly defined circumstances. The court observed that the provision mandates that a child in conflict with law shall be released on bail irrespective of the nature or gravity of the offence, unless one of the specific conditions laid down in the proviso to Section 12(1) is met, namely where reasonable grounds exist to believe that the juvenile’s release would result in association with known criminals, expose the juvenile to moral, physical or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice.

While addressing the grounds for bail, the High Court emphasized that the concept of “ends of justice” within the context of the Juvenile Justice Act must be interpreted in light of the object and purpose of the legislation, which is centred on the protection, rehabilitation, reform and development of children in conflict with law rather than punitive measures. The bench stated that it is only in exceptional circumstances where release would demonstrably impede these objectives that bail could lawfully be refused. The court underscored that the seriousness or nature of the alleged offence alone does not satisfy the criteria for denial of bail under Section 12, and mere allegations of a heinous or grave offence cannot be a determinative factor in refusing the statutory right to bail provided to juveniles. Even in cases where a juvenile is being tried as an adult, the High Court ruled that the bail application must be considered under Section 12 of the Act, and the statutory conditions must be applied without discrimination on account of age or the type of offence alleged.

The High Court drew attention to the statutory scheme which enshrines bail as the rule for juveniles in conflict with law, and stressed that the refusal of bail should always be narrowly tailored to the precise circumstances where one of the exceptional statutory conditions is undeniably established. In the case before it, the court found that the prosecution had not demonstrated that any of the exceptional conditions justifying denial of bail existed, and noted that the gravity of the allegations, even if serious, did not satisfy the statutory threshold for refusal under Section 12. The bench held that none of the circumstances presented by the prosecution showed that release of the juvenile would bring him into association with known criminals, expose him to harm, or otherwise defeat the ends of justice within the meaning contemplated by the Act.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the revision petition and directed that the petitioner be released on bail subject to furnishing the requisite bond and sureties as stipulated, with conditions appropriate to the juvenile’s continued appearances in the judicial process and supervision by guardians. The order reiterated the legislative mandate that the welfare objectives of the Juvenile Justice Act require a fundamentally different judicial approach to juveniles in conflict with law, prioritising their early reunion with family and rehabilitation, and making clear that bail cannot be withheld on the sole ground of the seriousness of the offence unless exceptional statutory conditions are met. The judgement stands as a reaffirmation of the position that bail is the norm for children in conflict with law under the Juvenile Justice Act and that the specified exceptional grounds for denial must be strictly and narrowly construed.

WhatsApp Group Invite

Join WhatsApp Community