Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:-

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

ORDER

This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this 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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as 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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.

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' => 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | ',
	'desc' => array(
		'Judgement' => array(
			'id' => '1194810',
			'acts' => null,
			'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
			'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
			'authreffered' => null,
			'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
			'casenote' => null,
			'caseanalysis' => null,
			'casesref' => null,
			'citingcases' => null,
			'counselplain' => '',
			'counseldef' => '',
			'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
			'court_type' => 'HC',
			'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
			'deposition' => null,
			'favorof' => null,
			'findings' => null,
			'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
			'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
			'observations' => null,
			'overruledby' => null,
			'prhistory' => null,
			'pubs' => null,
			'ratiodecidendi' => null,
			'respondent' => 'The State Through',
			'sub' => null,
			'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
			'circuit' => null
		)
	),
	'casename_url' => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state',
	'args' => array(
		(int) 0 => '1194810',
		(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
	)
)
$title_for_layout = 'Karan S O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs the State Through - Citation 1194810 - Court Judgment | '
$desc = array(
	'Judgement' => array(
		'id' => '1194810',
		'acts' => null,
		'appealno' => 'CRL.RP 200018/2017',
		'appellant' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod',
		'authreffered' => null,
		'casename' => 'Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through',
		'casenote' => '',
		'caseanalysis' => null,
		'casesref' => null,
		'citingcases' => null,
		'counselplain' => '',
		'counseldef' => '',
		'court' => 'Karnataka Kalaburagi',
		'court_type' => 'HC',
		'decidedon' => '2017-02-22',
		'deposition' => null,
		'favorof' => null,
		'findings' => null,
		'judge' => 'B.A.PATIL',
		'judgement' => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:</p><p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- </p>ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.</p><p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.</p><p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.</p><p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.</p><p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.</p><p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:</p><p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.</p><p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE',
		'observations' => null,
		'overruledby' => null,
		'prhistory' => null,
		'pubs' => null,
		'ratiodecidendi' => null,
		'respondent' => 'The State Through',
		'sub' => null,
		'link' => 'http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/155770/1/CRLRP200018-17-22-02-2017.pdf',
		'circuit' => null
	)
)
$casename_url = 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$args = array(
	(int) 0 => '1194810',
	(int) 1 => 'karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
)
$url = 'https://sooperkanoon.com/case/amp/1194810/karan-s-o-mohan-chinnararhod-vs-state'
$ctype = ' High Court'
$content = array(
	(int) 0 => '<p>1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE22D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B. A. PATIL CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.200018/2017 Between: Karan S/o Mohan Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 1 => '<p>16. years, Occ: Student R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist: Kalaburagi Through his father Mohan S/o Leku Chinnarathod Age:',
	(int) 2 => '<p>45. years, Occ: Private Work R/o Rummangud Tanda Tq: Chincholi, Dist. Kalaburagi (By Sri Ravi K. Anoor, Advocate for Sri Avinash Uplaonkar, Advocate) And: The State through Ratkal Police Station Dist. Kalaburagi Now represented by Addl. SPP., High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench (By Sri Maqbool Ahmed, HCGP) ... Petitioner ... Respondent 2 This Criminal Revision Petition is filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 praying to allow the Revision Petition and be pleased to set aside the order dated 05-01-2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and further the same being rejected by the II Addl. Sessions Judge at Kalaburagi in Crl. Appeal No.02/2017 by order dated 17th January 2017 and pleased to release the accused/petitioner on Bail in Crime No.146/2016 of Ratkal Police Station, Tq: Chincholli, Dist: Kalaburagi. This petition is coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following:- ',
	(int) 3 => 'ORDER<p> This petition is filed by the father of the child conflict with law under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (‘Act’ for short) praying to set aside the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi in Crime No.146/2016 and also to set aside the order dated 17.01.2017 passed by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017. 3 2. Brief facts leading to filing of the complaint are that, the father of the victim has lodged the complaint on 22.12.2016 at about 9:30 p.m. alleging that his wife and daughter went to attend the marriage ceremony in Rummangud Tanda. During midnight one Govardhan came and informed him that he heard screaming voice of a lady on his way with his father Aim Singh and when they went there, they noticed that the child in conflict with law forcibly had sex with victim girl and on he being advised the child in conflict with law, he gave a life threat to him. It is further alleged that the complainant along with Govardhan went to the spot, victim girl informed that child in conflict with law dragged her to room and committed sexual assault on her forcibly. Complainant brought the victim back to home and he along with his family went to the house of child in conflict with law and enquired his parents and brothers who did not heed to his request answering in rude manner and also gave life threat. When he 4 returned home, he noticed victim in uneasy condition and on enquiry she revealed that because of rape, she has lost her dignity in society and as such, she has consumed poison. Immediately thereafter, she was shifted to Hospital, where she breathed her last. On the basis of the complaint, a case has been registered against the child conflict with law who has been taken to custody and now he is in juvenile board. It is contended that the application was moved before Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the same was rejected. Thereafter, an appeal was preferred in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017, which also came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by such orders, now the petitioner is before this Court.',
	(int) 4 => '<p>3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent-State. 5 4. The main grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and he is juvenile. Under Section 12 of the Act, he is entitled to be released on bail. He would further contend that even the grounds, which have been enumerated in the said Section, have not been considered properly, and erroneously bail application has been rejected. He would further contend that the guardian/parent of the child in conflict with law has agreed to take protection of the child and he will see that he will be brought up in a good atmosphere and he will be kept under probation for his good conduct. He would submit that he is ready to abide by the conditions to be imposed by this Court and ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the petition.',
	(int) 5 => '<p>5. On the contrary, Sri Maqbool Ahmed, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for 6 the respondent-State has fairly assisted the Court at the time of considering this petition by collecting all the material and submitted that as per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act the juvenile offender shall be released on bail, but the exception would be that 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. He would contend that in this case the victim has already committed suicide by consuming poison and if he is released on bail, the ends of justice is going to be defeated. As such, on that ground the child conflict with law is not entitled to be released on bail. On these grounds, he prays for dismissal of the petition.',
	(int) 6 => '<p>6. I have carefully gone through the material produced along with the petition. For the purpose of 7 bravity and for proper appreciation of the case on hand, I quote Section 12 of the Act, which reads as under: “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.- (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of 8 justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order.',
	(int) 7 => '<p>4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail. 9 7. On going through the aforesaid Section it indicates that whether a child has committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and he is apprehended or detained by the police or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any 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 person. It is clear from the said Section that the only ground on which the bail petition has to be refused is that if there appears to be reasonable ground 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) 8 => '<p>8. On going through the entire material and law, the bail to the juvenile can only be refused if any 10 one of the grounds as mentioned above is existed. So far as the ground of gravity is concerned, it is not covered under the above provisions of the Act. If the bail application of the juvenile was to be considered under the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, there would have been absolutely no necessity for the enactment of the above said Act, in which Section 12 of the Act itself lays down that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or in any other law for the time being in force, the juvenile accused shall be released. Even the Parliament has re- considered the entire matter and repealed the old Act and thereafter new Act has been enacted in 2015.',
	(int) 9 => '<p>9. Keeping in view the above spirit of law and the propositions given by the various Courts and on perusal of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail application came to be rejected on the ground that if he is enlarged on bail, there would be possibility of 11 danger to his life and further there would be unexpected untoward incident. But the only ground on which the application has to be considered for the purpose of rejection is as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The reasons assigned by the Court below in this behalf appear to be not just and proper and as contemplated under the provisions of Section 12 of the Act. The other circumstances as enumerated in the Section are also not present. No material has been produced in this behalf. Under such circumstances, I feel that the orders, which have been passed by the Board and the Court, are not sustainable in law. The orders of the Court below nowhere show the existence of any one of the grounds for refusing the bail. Under such circumstances, refusal of the bail was not only unjustifiable, but it is illegal and against intention and spirit of the Act. 12 10. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the case and the discussion held by me above, I am of the considered opinion that if this child in conflict with law is entitled to be released on bail as contemplated under the said provisions by taking adequate security from his father who has filed affidavit duly sworn in this behalf with the condition that he will take care and custody of the child and also undertakes to the effect that he will see that he will not further involve in any such criminal activities and other antisocial activities so as to cause any harm to the society. For the aforementioned reasons, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 05.01.2017 in Crime No.146/2016 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kalaburagi and the order dated 17.01.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.2/2017 passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi are quashed. The child in conflict 13 with law (petitioner) shall be released on bail, subject to the following conditions:',
	(int) 10 => '<p>1. The revision petitioner shall be released on bail by executing the bond by his guardian/parent as observed above for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Court/Juvenile Justice Board; 2. He shall not indulge in hampering the investigation or tampering with the prosecution witnesses; 3. He shall make himself available to the Investigating Officer as and when required; 4. He shall appear before the concerned Court/Board regularly on all the dates of hearing without fail.',
	(int) 11 => '<p>5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE'
)
$paragraphAfter = (int) 1
$cnt = (int) 12
$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

5. He shall not leave the jurisdiction of the concerned Court/Board without its prior permission. sdu Sd/- JUDGE

Court	Karnataka Kalaburagi High Court
Decided On	Feb-22-2017
Case Number	CRL.RP 200018/2017
Judge	B.A.PATIL
Appellant	Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod
Respondent	The State Through

Karan S/O Mohan Chinnararhod Vs. The State Through - Court Judgment