Juvenile can not be directed to attend police station in Anticipatory bail apllication
What should have been done by the learned Sessions Judge when the juvenile applied for anticipatory bail, which in the present case was opposed by the Public Prosecutor, has also to be looked into. So far as the juvenile in conflict with law, the competent authority to deal with him is the Juvenile Justice Board. But, it has to be noticed whatever powers enjoined by the Juvenile Justice Board can be exercised by the High Court or the Court of Session. S. 6 of the Act deals with the powers of the Juvenile Justice Board. Sub-s.(2) of that section reads thus:
6. Powers of Juvenile Justice Board:(1) X X X(2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Court of Session, when the proceeding comes before them in appeal, revision or otherwise.
So much so, when any proceeding in relation to a juvenile comes before the High Court or the Court of Session ail powers conferred on the Board under the Act can be exercised. Such proceeding need not arise from appeal or revision. The words "or otherwise" used in sub-s.(2) of S. 6 of the Act is quite significant and it has to be given true meaning and spirit taking note of the objectives of the enactment When that be so, even in an application moved under S. 438 of the Code, orders could be passed by the Sessions Judge exercising the powers of the Juvenile Justice Board. At any rate, orders passed by the Sessions Judge should be in conformity with the provisions of the Act and not against or violative of the spirit and objectives of that Act. Where the police apprehends a juvenile in conflict with law, the Act mandates for placing the juvenile in charge of the special juvenile police unit or the designated police officer, and, such unit or police officer further bound to report the matter immediately to a member of the Juvenile Justice Board, there could be no direction or order to release the juvenile in the event of his arrest on execution of a bond as passed under Annexure-V order. Mandatory prescripttions covered by S. 10 of the Act have to be complied with by the police officer in the event of apprehension/arrest of juvenile in conflict with law, and once custody of the apprehended juvenile is handed over to the juvenile special unit or the designated police officer, what is his control over the juvenile is also taken care of under S. 11 of the Act. Such being the provisions covered by the Act to ensure the right of the juvenile in conflict with law, to prevent him from being exposed to police and police stations, Annexure-V order passed directing execution of bond by the petitioner in the event of his arrest and all other conditions imposed thereunder have no sanction of law, and they are vacated.
2013CriLJ851, ILR2013(1)Kerala48, 2013(1)KLJ102, 2012(4)KLT755, 2013(1)RCR(Criminal)809
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided On: 16.11.2012
Appellants: Gopakumar
Vs.
Respondent: State of Kerala
Vs.
Respondent: State of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. JusticeS.S. Satheesachandran
Hon'ble Mr. Justice
