Gujarat High Court: In a revision application against the orders of the Trial Court and the Juvenile Justice Board whereby, the bail applications of the child in conflict with law were rejected, Gita Gopi, J. allowed the application for not being directly involved in the offences under Sections 108, 115(2), 308(5) and 54 of the Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Factual Matrix
A First Information Report (FIR) was registered against the child in conflict with law for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 115(2), 308(5) and 54 of the Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’). In the matter at hand, recovery of Rs. 20,00,000/- from the deceased was to be made by accused 1 (‘factory owner.’) The deceased tried to recover his money from another person who had taken Rs. 5,53,000 from him five years ago and was not returning it to the deceased and was harassing him. It was alleged that due to the “atrocious and forcible” demand for money, the deceased along with his wife, son and daughter committed suicide. The child in conflict with law went to the factory of accused 1 to learn about the work. It was alleged that the child in conflict with law picked up a shovel which was lying in the factory and had given it to the accused 1 who had beaten the deceased with the shovel. The specific allegation was that under force and threat of accused 1, the deceased and his son were made to sign on a note, and that this act was video graphed by child in conflict with law on his mobile and the whole incident was captured in the CCTV Footage.
The case of child in conflict with law was that the Courts below failed to examine his role in the alleged offence.
Analysis and Decision
On perusal of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘JJ Act’), the Court noted that it mandates that when juvenile, in a bailable or non-bailable offence, arrested or detained or appears or brought before the Court, has to be released on bail with or without surety or place under the supervision of the Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution of fit person but shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. The Court said that in both the impugned orders, the Courts below did not examine the aspect of the report of the Probation Officer. Further, both the Courts also have failed to note as to whether the child in conflict with law would be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger and to examine these aspects.
The Court added that the prosecution’s case against the child in conflict with law was not that he had beaten the deceased, but it was of video graphing / recording the entire act. The Court said that recording of the act would rather be supporting evidence for the prosecution which would help the prosecution in assisting the Trial Court in deciding the matter. The Court explaining that Section 54 of BNS stresses on presence of the person when the act or offence is committed, said that it is a deeming provision to consider that when the person was present during the commission of act, he would be liable to be punished as an abettor and would be punished for the consequences of abetment. Hence, both the Courts below were required to call upon the psychologist’s report to examine the fact as to whether the deeming provision under Section 54 of BNS could be attracted against the child in conflict with law and whether his presence at the place of offence was intentional.
Therefore, the Court said that the child in conflict with law had not direct involvement. Further detention would affect him mentally, physically and emotionally and his development would get obstructed. The Court allowed the application and set aside the impugned decisions. The Court directed for his release on bail, on execution of a personal bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) before the JJ Board.
Further, the Court directed the Probation Officer to monitor the conduct of the child in conflict with law and to submit quarterly report before the Trial Court. Moreover, if the Probation Officer considers any necessity of sending the child for any behaviour modification, then necessary therapy and psychiatric support be provided to the child. The mother of the child was directed to ensure that the child will not fall into bad company.
[X v. State of Gujarat, 2024 SCC OnLine Guj 3493, decided on: 28-08-2024]
