Niraj Thakur @ Niraj Kumar Thakur Vs State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court 24 Jan 2012 Criminal Rev. No. 461 of 2011 (2012) 01 JH CK 0031
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Criminal Rev. No. 461 of 2011

Hon'ble Bench

Rakesh Ranjan Prasad, J

Advocates

J.S. Tripathy, for the Appellant;

Final Decision

Allowed

Acts Referred
  • Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 - Section 12
  • Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 34, 366A, 376

Judgement Text

Translate:

@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER

R.R. Prasad, J.@mdashHeard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. This criminal revision application is directed against the judgment dated 20.11.2010 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Garhwa, in Cr. Appeal No. 50 of 2010, affirming the order dated 11.10.2010 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa in Manjhiaon P.S. Case No. 34 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. No. 574 of 2010 wherein Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

2. On an allegation that this petitioner alongwith other co-accused, kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant for the purpose of marrying her, lodged a case which was registered as Manjhiaon P.S. Case No. 34 of 2010 u/s 366A of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, charge sheet was submitted against this petitioner as well as two other accused, namely, Vikash Yadav and Tapeshwar Yadav u/s 376/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Since the petitioner was found juvenile, an application was filed before Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa for release of the petitioner on bail, but that was rejected and thereafter an appeal being Cr. Appeal No. 50 of 2010 was preferred before the learned Sessions Judge, Garhwa, which was rejected, after holding that the release of the petitioner would be detrimental to the interest of the society and the release would put him in association of such type of person to commit the offence, but that finding recorded by the appellate Court does not seems to have been based on any materials rather it seems to be conjecture and surmises on the part of the Court whereas Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa, while rejecting the prayer for bail, has not assigned any reason in terms of the proviso of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and, therefore, both the orders are fit be set aside.

4. Accordingly, both the orders dated 11.10.2010 and 20.11.2010 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa and learned Sessions Judge, Garhwa in Manjhiaon P.S. Case No. 34 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. No. 574 of 2010 and Cr. Appeal No. 50 of 2010 respectively, are hereby set aside.

5. Consequently, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Garhwa, in connection with Manjhiaon P.S. Case No. 34 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. No. 574 of 2010, on giving undertaking by the father of the petitioner that the petitioner would not be allowed to come in association with the criminal. Thus, this application stands allowed.

From The Blog
Madras High Court Declares Hostels Are Residential Properties, Not Commercial: No Higher Tax or Tariff Allowed
Nov
13
2025

Court News

Madras High Court Declares Hostels Are Residential Properties, Not Commercial: No Higher Tax or Tariff Allowed
Read More
Punjab & Haryana High Court: Income Tax Reassessment Beyond Four Years Invalid After Section 143(3) Assessment
Nov
13
2025

Court News

Punjab & Haryana High Court: Income Tax Reassessment Beyond Four Years Invalid After Section 143(3) Assessment
Read More