Aastha Thakur
Published on: 07 September 2022 at 19:35 IST
The Bombay High Court granted bail to a juvenile accused in a gang rape case after observing that the results of rehabilitation are positive and he needs to be reunited with his family.
Justice Bharati Dangre was hearing the bail plea of the juvenile in conflict with law observed that the education of the child, who is now adult, can’t be discontinued and allowing him to live with his family would help him to develop his full potential.
The judge highlighted that, “The applicant has positively responded to the rehabilitative efforts, during his stay in the Observation Home, which is in tune of the Act of 2015. He deserves to be reunited and restored with his family and it would be in his best interest so that he can develop himself with full potential,”
She underlined that he deserves the second chance by allowing him to rejoin society by invoking the principle of repatriation and restoration to the same socio-economic and cultural status that he was in before commission of alleged crime.
On the basis of aforementioned reasons, the Court granted bail to the convicted boy, accused for the gang rape of minor girl in 2020. The applicant here was booked under the offences of gang-rape, criminal assault, stalking, criminal intimidation under the Indian Penal Code as well as provisions of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The Juvenile Justice Board has denied him bail application twice and after initial assessment concluded that the trial against him can be transferred before the Special Court.
After transfer of case, the juvenile again filed for bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. The bail was rejected again giving reasoning that he may try to harm the victim again. Aggrieved by the order, the applicant moved High Court seeking bail.
The counsel appearing for the petitioner here submitted that due to detention in the Observation Home his life is disrupted and his study has been discontinued.
Further, the counsel submitted the report furnished by the Child Guidance Clinic, shows the positive response of the convict juvenile and the good potential to excel if right directions been given to him, and it can be possible if he gets adequate support and education.
Further, it was submitted that the guardian of the applicant is willing to keep him at his home in Mumbai and an NGO in Mumbai is also there to help him in rehabilitation.
Whereas, the opposite counsel put emphasis on the grave nature of offence committed by the applicant. It was submitted by the Advocate Saveena Bedi Sachar that being involved in heinous crime nullify his option to be released on bail.
The Court noted from the factual circumstances that no risk could be established to the victim by the accused or his family.
The Bench in end parted with the case stating,“The accusations faced by the applicant are undisputedly serious, but he must also derive the benefit of being a ‘child’, despite he being tried as an adult and the benefit of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 cannot be denied to him”