Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: kword [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123]
Code Context
                                    }

                                //highest occurence of word in the judgement

                                echo $this->Wand->highlight($this->Excerpt->extractRelevant($kword,strtolower(strip_tags($desc['Judgement']['judgement']))), $query) . "</div>";
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123]
Code Context
                                    }

                                //highest occurence of word in the judgement

                                echo $this->Wand->highlight($this->Excerpt->extractRelevant($kword,strtolower(strip_tags($desc['Judgement']['judgement']))), $query) . "</div>";
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 123
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(1) this is first application which has been preferred under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure on behalf of applicant satendra who is aged 17 years. he claims himself to be juvenile. (2) case diary has been perused. applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with crime no.75/2014 registered at police station mau, district bhind for the offence punishable 2 mcrc.4183.2014 satendra sharma vs. the state of m.p. under sections 294, 302, 34 of ipc. (3) as per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village padaria and the same was opposed by naval sharma and gurali sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. in the noon, ashok was trying to stop them by saying that.....

Judgment:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 0
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 1
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 2
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 3
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 4
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 5
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 6
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 7
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 8
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 9
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 10
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 11
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 12
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 13
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 14
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 15
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 16
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 17
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 18
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 19
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 20
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 21
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(2) No appeal shall lie from -

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 22
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 23
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 24
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 25
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 26
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 27
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 28
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 29
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 30
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 31
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 32
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 33
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

may be specified in the order.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 34
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 35
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 36
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 37
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 38
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(i) xx xx xx

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 39
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(ii) xx xx xx

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 40
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

9 Mcrc.4183.2014

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 41
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 42
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(2) xx xx xx

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 43
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(3) xx xx xx

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 44
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(4) xx xx xx

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 45
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(5) xx xx xx

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 46
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(6) xx xx xx

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 47
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(7) xx xx xx

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 48
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 49
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 50
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 51
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 52
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 53
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109

(23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.

Notice (8): Undefined variable: query [APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144]
Code Context
                                         echo $this->Adsense->display('responsive_rect'); 

                                        }

                                        echo html_entity_decode($this->Wand->highlight($content[$i], $query));
$viewFile = '/home/legalcrystal/app/View/Case/amp.ctp'
$dataForView = array(
	'title_for_layout' => 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1182538',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
			'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => null,
			'counseldef' => null,
			'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
			'judgement' => '<p style="text-align: justify;">(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> may be specified in the order.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (i) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (2) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (3) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (4) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (5) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (6) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (7) xx xx xx</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p style="text-align: justify;"> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => null,
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1182538',
		(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Satendra Sharma Vs the State of M P - Citation 1182538 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1182538',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'Misc. Cri. Case No. 4183 of 2014 ',
		'appellant' => ' Satendra Sharma ',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => ' Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => null,
		'counseldef' => null,
		'court' => 'Madhya Pradesh',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2014-07-08',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.D. Rathi',
		'judgement' => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.</p><p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.</p><p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.</p><p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.</p><p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.</p><p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.</p><p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.</p><p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.</p><p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.</p><p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:</p><p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.</p><p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.</p><p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.</p><p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:</p><p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:</p><p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.</p><p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -</p><p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or</p><p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.</p><p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.</p><p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:</p><p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:</p><p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.</p><p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:</p><p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.</p><p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.</p><p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> may be specified in the order.</p><p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.</p><p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:</p><p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-</p><p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-</p><p> (i) xx xx xx</p><p> (ii) xx xx xx</p><p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014</p><p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> (2) xx xx xx</p><p> (3) xx xx xx</p><p> (4) xx xx xx</p><p> (5) xx xx xx</p><p> (6) xx xx xx</p><p> (7) xx xx xx</p><p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"</p><p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.</p><p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.</p><p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.</p><p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.</p><p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.</p>',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State of M.P.',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => null,
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1182538',
	(int) 1 => 'satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1182538/satendra-sharma-vs-state-m-p'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>(1) This is first application which has been preferred under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on behalf of applicant Satendra who is aged 17 years. He claims himself to be juvenile.',
	(int) 1 => '<p> (2) Case diary has been perused. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.75/2014 registered at Police Station Mau, District Bhind for the offence punishable 2 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 2 => '<p> under Sections 294, 302, 34 of IPC.',
	(int) 3 => '<p> (3) As per the prosecution case, incident occurred on 24.02.2014 between 11 am to 12 noon when the work of maintenance of public road was going on at village Padaria and the same was opposed by Naval Sharma and Gurali Sharma by saying that the land was belonging to them. In the noon, Ashok was trying to stop them by saying that do not oppose. Thereafter, Ashok was beaten by Anand S/o Kalyan, Satendra, Bheekaram, Naval and Gurali on account of which Ashok fell down on the ground and died on the spot. FIR was lodged by Ramsharan Sharma and on that basis Crime No.75/2014 has been registered.',
	(int) 4 => '<p> (4) Anticipatory bail application No.66/2014 was preferred by Bheekaram and present applicant Satendra before the Sessions Court and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge on 14.03.2014.',
	(int) 5 => '<p> (5) It is submitted by Shri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, that as per the High School Marksheet-cum-Certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal, date of birth of the applicant is 04.06.1996 and accordingly, on the date of incident applicant was below 18 years of age. Therefore, in view of the provisions contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity "the Act"), applicant has right to get benefit of anticipatory bail 3 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 6 => '<p> because he has falsely been implicated. It is also submitted by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act, the power conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session also. Further, it is argued that provisions of Act have overriding effect on the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it is not necessary for the applicant to appear before the court personally. He may appear by filing such type of anticipatory bail application before the court. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Tara Chand Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2007 Cri.L.J. 3047 and Mohan, Applicant (in jail) V. State of Chhattisgarh, non applicant reported in 2005 Cri.L.J. 3271.',
	(int) 7 => '<p> (6) Per contra, it is submitted by Shri Awasthy, learned Public Prosecutor and Shri Katare, learned counsel for the complainant, that this Court has no jurisdiction to decide the anticipatory bail application specially for juvenile because in the Act provision of anticipatory bail application has not been co-added. The only provision made under the Act for the bail of a juvenile is in Section 12 and according to that until and unless juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or brought before a Board, the application of such juvenile cannot be considered. Apart that, heinous offence has been committed by the applicant, therefore, he does not deserve the benefit of 4 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 8 => '<p> anticipatory bail and thus the application preferred by him should be dismissed.',
	(int) 9 => '<p> (7) It is also submitted on behalf of the State that as per the provisions of Section 6(2) of the Act the powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, but only in appeal, revision or otherwise. Otherwise means in proceedings filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or in writ petition filed under the Articles of Constitution but the same cannot be exercised in deciding the anticipatory bail applications because if it is so then directly or indirectly juvenile will be deprived of his legal right given to him under Section 52 and 53 of the Act [Appeals and Revisions respectively] because if the matter is directly decided by the High Court against the juvenile, he cannot file appeal before the Court of Session or Revision before the High Court. To strengthen their stand, State placed reliance on Kapil Durgawani V. State of M.P. reported in 2011(1) MPWN 56.',
	(int) 10 => '<p> (8) It is also submitted by Shri Katare, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that in this case charge sheet has already been filed and the present applicant Satendra Sharma has been shown by the prosecution as absconder. Therefore, in view of the decision rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 1 SCC (Cri.) 768, 5 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 11 => '<p> applicant is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail as he is under absconsion.',
	(int) 12 => '<p> (9) Having regard to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, case diary and the relevant provisions of the Act have been perused.',
	(int) 13 => '<p> (10) Provisions contained under Section 6 of the Act are as under:',
	(int) 14 => '<p> Section 6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Where a Board has been constituted for any district, such Board shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under this Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law.',
	(int) 15 => '<p> (2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.',
	(int) 16 => '<p> (11) Section 6(2) of the Act clearly says that powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise. The word "otherwise" cannot be interpreted for bail applications because if it so then juvenile will be deprived directly or indirectly of his legal right given under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.',
	(int) 17 => '<p> (12) Section 52 of the Act reads as under:',
	(int) 18 => '<p> Section 52 Appeals.-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty 6 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 19 => '<p> days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:',
	(int) 20 => '<p> Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.',
	(int) 21 => '<p> (2) No appeal shall lie from -',
	(int) 22 => '<p> (a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or',
	(int) 23 => '<p> (b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.',
	(int) 24 => '<p> (3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.',
	(int) 25 => '<p> (13) Similarly, provisions contained under Section 53 of the Act read as under:',
	(int) 26 => '<p> Section 53 Revision - The High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding in which any competent authority or Court Session has passed an order for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any such order and may pass such order in relation thereto as it thinks fit:',
	(int) 27 => '<p> Provided that the High Court shall not pass an order under this Section prejudicial to any person without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.',
	(int) 28 => '<p> (14) On bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions contained under Section 52 of the Act, it is clear that if any person, aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority then he may prefer an appeal to the Court of Session. Similarly, in view of the provisions of Section 53, High Court may, at any time, either of its own motion or on an application received in 7 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 29 => '<p> this behalf, call for the record of any proceeding of competent authority or Court Session. Now, if the bail application of a juvenile is decided by the High Court or the Court of Session then the persons aggrieved cannot file an appeal before the Court of Session and cannot file a revision before the High Court. So, only on the basis of interpretation of word "otherwise", the right given by Section 52 and 53 of the Act cannot be snatched. Accordingly, arguments advanced by Shri Sharma, learned counsel, cannot be acceptable. (15) The provision of bail for juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which reads as under:',
	(int) 30 => '<p> 12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he 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.',
	(int) 31 => '<p> (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.',
	(int) 32 => '<p> (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as 8 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 33 => '<p> may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 34 => '<p> (16) On bare perusal of this provision, it is clear that the bail application of a juvenile can be entertained by the Board only when he is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board otherwise application cannot be entertained. If the juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before the Board then certainly bail application will be filed under Section 12 and the same be decided by the Board only but not by the High Court or Court of Session as discussed above.',
	(int) 35 => '<p> (17) So far as the word "appears" has been used in Section 12 as mentioned above is concerned, it has not been defined in the Act and for this purpose we will have to see the provisions of Section 437 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The word "appears" has been inserted in the same way as herein under Section 12 of the Act. (18) It would be profitable to quote here Section 437 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:',
	(int) 36 => '<p> 437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.-',
	(int) 37 => '<p> (1) When any person accused of or suspected of the commission of any non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-',
	(int) 38 => '<p> (i) xx xx xx',
	(int) 39 => '<p> (ii) xx xx xx',
	(int) 40 => '<p> 9 Mcrc.4183.2014',
	(int) 41 => '<p> Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 42 => '<p> (2) xx xx xx',
	(int) 43 => '<p> (3) xx xx xx',
	(int) 44 => '<p> (4) xx xx xx',
	(int) 45 => '<p> (5) xx xx xx',
	(int) 46 => '<p> (6) xx xx xx',
	(int) 47 => '<p> (7) xx xx xx',
	(int) 48 => '<p> (19) From Section 437, it appears that the words "arrest"',
	(int) 49 => '<p> and "detention" are used to signify arrest and detention by a police officer.',
	(int) 50 => '<p> (20) The expression "appears" and "is brought" are used to signify appearance and arrest in obedience to a process of Court. The expression "appears" occurring in this section does not mean appearance through pleader. When a person appears in Court, his physical presence results in placing himself in custody of court for the purpose of releasing him on bail, therefore, meaning of word "appears" used under Section 12 of the Act will be the same as used in Section 437 of Cr.P.C.',
	(int) 51 => '<p> (21) The anticipatory bail can be granted in anticipation of arrest but such proceedings are not inserted in the Act. The only provision for bail of Juvenile is given under Section 12 of the Act which has been discussed as above. (22) In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the view that application for grant of anticipatory bail preferred by the juvenile cannot be entertained by the High Court or 10 Mcrc.4183.2014 Satendra Sharma Vs. The State of M.P.',
	(int) 52 => '<p> the Court of Session by applying the provision contained under Section 6(2) of the Act. The powers conferred on the Board can be used by High Court and the Court of Session only when proceedings come before them in appeal, revision or otherwise except under Section 438 and 439 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the interpretation made by the learned Single Judge of the Hon. Rajasthan High Court and Hon. Chhattisgarh High Court.',
	(int) 53 => '<p> (23) Accordingly, application for grant of anticipatory bail by the applicant is hereby dismissed. However, the applicant is at liberty to appear before the competent authority and thereafter if he proves himself to be juvenile and moves an appropriate application for his release on bail under Section 12 of the Act then the same be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law.',
	(int) 54 => ''
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 55
$i = (int) 54
include - APP/View/Case/amp.ctp, line 144
View::_evaluate() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 971
View::_render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 933
View::render() - CORE/Cake/View/View.php, line 473
Controller::render() - CORE/Cake/Controller/Controller.php, line 963
Dispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 200
Dispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/Cake/Routing/Dispatcher.php, line 167
[main] - APP/webroot/index.php, line 109