Even If Juvenile Is To Be Treated Like An Adult, He Still Cannot Be Denied Benefit Of Bail U/s. 12 JJ Act: P&H High Court
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently, while directing to release a juvenile on bail, reiterated that even if a "Child in Conflict with Law" is to be treated like an adult considering the heinous crime committed, he shall remain a juvenile and cannot be denied the benefit of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of the Children) Act 2015.
It is to be noted that Section 12 of the Act provides for bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.
While noting that the Act is a ‘beneficial piece of legislation’ which is to provide care, protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation of neglected or delinquent juveniles, a bench of Justice N.S.Shekhawat observed, “Even when a child is sent up for trial as an adult before a Children’s Court, the child does not become an adult or ‘major’, but is only to be treated differently considering the heinous nature of the offence alleged and consequent need for a stricter treatment of the offender, though still as a juvenile in conflict with law. It must be borne in mind that the Legislature has created this categorization based upon an assessment of the child’s mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, ability to understand the offence. If the intention of the Legislature was that upon such assessment, the child would de-jure become an adult, then the question of there being a separate Children’s Court to try him with specific safeguards provided for the trial would not arise. That however is not the case”.
Advocate Balvinder Sangwan appeared for the appellant and DAG Sheenu Sura appeared for the State of Haryana.
In the present matter, the appellant-‘Child In conflict with Law’ challenged an order passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad for an offence under Sections 302 and 34 of IPC (Section 34 of IPC deleted and Section 25 of the Arms Act added later on) wherein the bail application was dismissed.
Therefore, the question that was to be considered again was whether on being tried as an adult, is the juvenile denuded of statutory right available to him under Section 12 of the Act.
Even though, the law is settled on the current proposition, the Court noting the facts and circumstances in the case was of the opinion that the Children’s Court had rejected the application without adverting to the statutory mandate of Section 12 of the Act.
It is pertinent to note that the only embargo for not releasing such a person on bail is the proviso under Section 12 of the Act, which states that on finding reasonable grounds that upon release the juvenile will likely come into an association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical, or psychological danger, or the person's release would defeat the ends of justice.
The court also took note of the fact that the present appellant was arrested in the case on December 7, 2020 and is continuing in custody, thereby his right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is also violated.
“No doubt, the appellant/CCL was directed to be tried like an adult, but still he remains a juvenile in conflict with law and can never be denied the benefit of Section 12 of the Act”, the bench observed in the order.
Cause Title: Sachin @ Suraj v. State of Haryana [Neutral Citation no: 2023:PHHC:088616]
Click here to read/download the Order
