By Tanvi Mehta.  

The Gujarat High Court recently addressed significant issues surrounding bail for a child in conflict with law (CCL) in a case involving extortion leading to suicide. The court’s ruling highlights the delicate balance between juvenile justice principles and the severity of alleged offenses. 

The case originated from an FIR registered on 11.07.2024 at Bhanvad Police Station, District Devbhumi Dwarka, for offenses under Sections 108, 115(2), 308(5), and 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). The CCL, aged about 17 years, was implicated in a case where the main accused allegedly extorted money from the deceased, leading to the suicide of the deceased and his family members. Initially, the Juvenile Justice Board and the Additional Sessions Judge had rejected the CCL’s bail application. The CCL, through his mother as guardian, filed a revision application in the High Court under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act). 

The High Court examined two key issues: (1) The applicability of Section 12 of the JJ Act in granting bail to a CCL & (2) The role and culpability of the CCL in the alleged offense. 

On the first issue, the court noted that both lower courts had failed to properly consider Section 12 of the JJ Act. This section mandates that a juvenile must be released on bail unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that the release would bring the CCL into association with criminals, expose them to moral, physical, or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice. The High Court emphasized that a report from the Probation Officer should have been called for to examine these aspects. 

Regarding the second issue, the court carefully examined the CCL’s alleged role in the offense. The prosecution claimed that the CCL had handed a shovel to the main accused, who used it to beat the deceased, and that the CCL had recorded the incident on his mobile phone. However, the court noted that the CCL had not directly participated in the beating and that his act of recording could potentially serve as supporting evidence for the prosecution. 

The court also considered Section 54 of the BNS, which deals with the presence of an abettor during the commission of an offense & observed that it was necessary to examine whether this provision could be applied to the CCL, given his age and the circumstances of his presence at the crime scene. After careful consideration, the High Court decided to exercise discretion in favor of the CCL and grant bail. The court set aside the orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and the Additional Sessions Judg a  

1. The CCL’s role was limited and did not involve direct participation in the main offense. 

2. The lower courts had failed to consider the potential impact of detention on the CCL’s mental, physical, and emotional development. 

3. The need for a psychological assessment to determine the CCL’s intent and understanding of the situation. 

The court ordered the release of the CCL on bail, with his mother executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000. Additionally, the court directed the Probation Officer to monitor the CCL’s conduct and submit quarterly reports to the Trial Court. The court also emphasized the possibility of behavior modification therapy and psychiatric support if deemed necessary by the Probation Officer. 

[Case: X v. State of Gujarat & Others, Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 125] 

Click here to read/download the judgment