IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No. 308 of 2009
Ajay Yadav @ Ajay Kumar Yadav ... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... ...Opp. Party
----------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Jai Shankar Tiwari, Advocate
For the State : A.P.P.
-----------
5/25.08.2009
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel
for State.
This revision application is directed against the order
impugned dated 12.02.2009 passed by Shri Prem Kumar Gupta,
learned Sessions Judge, Chatra confirming the order passed by the
Juvenile Justice Board dated 06.01.2009 in Piparwar P.S. Case
No.45 of 2008 rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner-juvenile
under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2000.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
case against the petitioner is based only on the confessional
statement made by co-accused Laxman @ Lachu Turi under
Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. wherein he stated that the petitioner’s
step brother was kidnapped by him at the instance of the
petitioner’s father Ram Nath Yadav and at their instance he
committed murder of the petitioner’s step brother and threw him
on railway track. Police during investigation found no evidence of
murder and as observed by the Trial Court in spite of vigorous
search was made for recovery of the dead body as mentioned in
Para 47-65 of the case diary that no evidence leading to the said
statement was found and as such the petitioner against whom
there is no previous criminal history and the probation officer has
also found that he is innocent person and since the petitioner is in
jail custody since 19.08.2008 now for more than one year and
hence he should be granted bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act which is social and
beneficial legislation.
Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the
prayer on the ground that the petitioner is involved in serious
offence of murder of his step brother but from the report of
2
probation officer dated 17th December, 2008 it appears that there is
no criminal history of the juvenile and it further appears that he has
become victim of circumstances in which his step brother was
firstly kidnapped and it then appears that he has been done to
death.
After haring both the parties and going through the record, I
find that the prosecution case was started on the basis of First
Information Report lodged by the petitioner’s step sister alleging
therein that his step brother in collusion with one Laxman @ Lachu
Turi and Ram Nath Yadav kidnapped her brother and he is
traceless. Subsequently, the said Ram Nath Yadav was arrested
and he confessed his guilt under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. that at
the instance of petitioner’s father Ram Nath Yadav and the
petitioner, he kidnapped the boy and committed his murder and
threw on railway track but as noted above by the Sessions Judge in
his order the police has failed to recover the dead body nor have
collected any evidence in support of said confessional statement
made by the co-accused .
It is important to note that seriousness of case is no ground
to refuse thef prayer of bail of juvenile. It appears that this juvenile
has become a victim of circumstances as opined by the probation
officer in his report dated 17th December, 2008, he found that the
juvenile petitioner has got no criminal history and for his release in
the affidavit of his elder brother that he will continue his regular
education as he has already passed his matriculation examination
and want to continue his study in Intermediate.
After going through the record I find that since there is no
criminal history and there is no chance that he will go in the hands
of any criminal organization.
In that view of the matter since the petitioner is a student of
intermediate and he is pursuing his education. He got involved on
the basis of this F.I.R. lodged by the step sister, and has remained
in jail for more than one year and hence it is desirable that he
should be released on bail.
Accordingly, the petitioner, above named is directed to be
released on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties
of like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri Ranjeet Kumar,
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Chatra cum Principal Magistrate,
Chatra subject to the condition that one of the bailors would be his
3
elder brother Bacha Lal Yadav who will file an undertaking that he
will keep the juvenile under his care and custody and that he would
continue his education and will keep him away from any criminal
activities.
With the aforesaid observation this revision application is
allowed and order dated 12th February, 2009 passed by the
Sessions Judge, Chatra in Cr. Appeal No. 10 of 2009 confirming the
order dated 06.01.2009 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board in
Piparwar P.S. Case No.45 of 2008 is set aside and thus this revision
application is allowed.
Let this order communicated by the FAX at the cost
deposited by the petitioner.
(Pradeep Kumar, J.)
Anit