The Supreme Court recently granted bail to a juvenile accused who spent more than 2 years in custody.
As per Section 436-A CrPC, one can be released from custody if he has spent more than half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence. Interestingly, in this case the accused had spent more than 482 days as an adult in jail even though he was a juvenile. Thereafter he was tried as a juvenile where he spent another 242 days in an observation home. A pertinent question of law had arisen here - Would he be entitled to be released as per section 436A CrPC since he has already undergone more than half of the maximum sentence of 3 years prescribed under JJ Act? Would provisions of CrPC apply under JJ Act?
The Rajasthan High Court had held that “where a juvenile is undergoing action under the Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children)Act, 2015, he is not entitled to get the benefit of provisions of Section 436A CrPC”.
Considering a special leave petition filed against the High Court judgment, a bench comprising Justices AS Bopanna and Sudhanshu Dhulia did not delve into such questions of law at this stage and held that “Though contentions with regard to the nature of the order passed by the High court is referred to, at this stage we see no need to go into all aspects of the matter, in as much as at the outset, we note that the petitioner has been in custody for more than two years”
Advocate-on-Record Namit Saxena appeared for the petitioner.
Petitioner's Case :
There was a marriage proposal and arrangement between the petitioner and the respondent’s daughter but due to some family dispute their marriage was called off.
On 17th April 2021, the alleged victim voluntarily went with the petitioner and his mother to Chanchauda, MP. The very next day FIR was lodged by the complainant Tarachand.
On 21st April, the victim along with the petitioner and his mother came back to Kota and got married in a temple. The next day, the couple went to SP to lodge a complaint about threats from the victim's family but the girl was taken to Nariniketan Kota by the police.
The police recorded her statement under section 161 CrPC where the victim said that she went with the petitioner voluntarily, got married, and wanted to live with him.
Petitioner was arrested on 29th April 2021 when he was minor at the time but is being treated as an adult.
PROCEDURAL MATRIX
The Police filed the Chargesheet u/s 363, 366-A, 368, 376 of IPC and Sections 3, 4,16 and 17 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)Act, 2015(the Act) against the petitioner. The petitioner filed the first bail application before the Juvenile Justice Board under section 12 of the Act which was dismissed on 10.10.2022
An appeal before the Court of Special Judge, POCSO Cases, Kota was also dismissed.
Thereafter a Criminal Revision Petition u/s 102 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 before the Rajasthan High Court which was also dismissed on 05.12.2022.
Then, a second round of bail applications ensued, all of which were rejected. The High Court again dismissed the criminal revision petition on 10.04.2023.
Already spent more than half of maximum sentence under JJ Act,2015: Must be released argued petitioner
The petitioner contended that he had remained in jail for 489 days as an adult. It was only after 30.08.2022, that he was tried by the Juvenile Justice Board and has been in Child Observation Home, Kota since then for more than 242 days.
He submitted that the victim was neither abducted nor raped. She had voluntarily gone with him and got married as evident from her statement under section 161 CrPC. However, under threat from the family, she was made to change her statement under section 164 CrPC.
He contended that he had already served more than half of the maximum sentence(3 years) under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection)Act,2015, and deserved to be released on bail as per Section 436A CrPC
Juveniles don't go to jail, can't treat them as undertrial prisoners to release them under Section 436-A CrPC held Rajasthan HC
The Rajasthan High Court held that the provision is applicable only on pending matters against adult accused however the present matter relates to minor petitioner/juvenile.
It observed that “juveniles in conflict with the law are not undertrial prisoners and are not lodged in prison after arrest, instead such minor children are kept in Special Children’s Homes for care and proper protection.”
Case title: VK Juvenile v State of Rajasthan
Click Here To Read/Download Order
