Gravity of Offence Alone Cannot Deny Bail to a Juvenile, Holds MP High Court Gwalior Bench

The Madhya Pradesh High Court set aside two orders rejecting bail to a juvenile, holding that seriousness of the alleged offence is not a statutory ground under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

The Gwalior Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court granted bail to a juvenile who had been in custody since 1 April 2026, after finding that neither the Juvenile Justice Board, District Guna, nor the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Guna had identified any specific material to attract the statutory exceptions that permit detention of a child in conflict with law. Justice Anand Singh Bahrawat, sitting singly, allowed Criminal Revision No. 1704 of 2026 on 25 May 2026, setting aside both the Board's order dated 2 April 2026 and the appellate court's order dated 9 April 2026. The court held that the gravity of the alleged offence, standing alone, is not a permissible reason to withhold bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

The Dispute Before the High Court

The juvenile, described in the cause title as a child in conflict with law, was apprehended in connection with Crime No. 181/2026 registered at Police Station Cantt, District Guna. The offences alleged against the juvenile were under Sections 103(1), 109(1), 191(2), 190, 296(B), 115(2), and 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

An application under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 was moved before the Juvenile Justice Board, District Guna seeking bail. The Board rejected it by order dated 2 April 2026. The juvenile then filed Criminal Appeal No. 59/2026 before the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Guna, which was dismissed on 9 April 2026, affirming the Board's order. The juvenile, through her guardian father, then filed the present criminal revision before the High Court under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

The Legal Issue: What Section 12 Requires

Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 creates a default entitlement to bail for any person apparently a child alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence. The provision overrides the Code of Criminal Procedure. A juvenile may be denied bail only if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that release is likely to bring the child into association with known criminals, expose the child to moral, physical, or psychological danger, or that release would defeat the ends of justice. The Board is required to record reasons and the circumstances that led to denial.

Counsel for the juvenile, Shri Alok Kumar Sharma, argued that both courts below had rejected bail primarily on the seriousness of the alleged offence without recording any specific material to demonstrate that any of the three statutory exceptions applied. The State, represented by Public Prosecutor Shri Dilip Awasthi, opposed the revision and contended that the gravity of the offence and the manner in which the incident occurred justified the rejection, and that release might defeat the ends of justice.

How the Bench Reasoned

Justice Bahrawat examined the material on record, including a report submitted by the Probation Officer. That report indicated that the possibility of improvement in the conduct of the child under proper care and family supervision could not be ruled out.

The court found that apart from the gravity of the alleged offence, there was no specific material available on record to show that the juvenile's release would bring her into association with known criminals, expose her to moral, physical, or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice. The court observed that none of the three statutory exceptions under Section 12 of the Act had been made out on the basis of concrete material.

The court held that it did not find any exceptional circumstance to decline bail to the juvenile applicant. The reasoning of the courts below, resting solely on the seriousness of the charges, did not satisfy the statutory threshold that Section 12 sets for withholding bail from a child in conflict with law.

Conditions Imposed on Release

The court directed that the juvenile be handed over to the custody of her natural guardian, her father, on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) along with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board or the court concerned.

Eight conditions were attached to the bail. The juvenile must cooperate in the investigation and trial. She must not extend any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case. She must not commit a similar offence. She must not seek unnecessary adjournments during trial. During the bail period, she shall remain under the supervision and control of her father, who shall be responsible for her maintenance, well-being, and overall activities.

The father must give an undertaking that the juvenile will not be permitted to come into contact or association with any known criminal or be exposed to any moral, physical, or psychological danger, and that she will not repeat the offence. The juvenile must report to the Probation Officer on the last date of every calendar month. The Probation Officer is directed to keep strict vigil on the juvenile's activities and regularly draw up a social investigation report for submission to the Juvenile Justice Board at such periodic intervals as the Board may require. The father must also ensure the juvenile's appearance before the Board on all dates fixed until final disposal of the case.

A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the Juvenile Justice Board or court concerned for information and compliance.

Outcome

Criminal Revision No. 1704 of 2026 was allowed. The order dated 9 April 2026 passed by the Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Guna in Criminal Appeal No. 59/2026, and the order dated 2 April 2026 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, District Guna, were both set aside. The juvenile was granted bail subject to the eight conditions set out above.