Page 1 of 15

BEFORE THE JUVENILE JUSTICE BOARD

SRINAGAR
**********************************
File No. 126/JJB/SGR.

Date of Institution: 08.03.2022 Date of Order: 20.04.2022

In the case of:

Mr. ABC
(Name withheld)

Through his Father

Applicant/Child in Conflict with Law (CICL)

Through Advocate: Mr. Mir Tashveeq

& Associates

VERSUS

UT of J & K through S.H.O

Police Station Nowhatta, Srinagar
(Non-Applicants)

Through A.P.P: Mr. Zaffar Iqbal Shaheen

for U.T of J & K

Case FIR No. 08/2022 of Police Station Nowhatta, Srinagar

Offences under Sections 326-A IPC

In the matter of:-

Application under Section 12 of the
Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 seeking bail
of Child in Conflict with Law (CICL).
_______________________________________________________________
CORAM:
1. Touseef Ahmad Magray (Principal Magistrate)
2. Dr. Khair Ul Nisa (Member)
3. Dr. Asima Hassan (Member)
_______________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 2 of 15

O R D E R
20.04.2022

FACTUAL BACKGROUND:-

1. The Applicant/Child in Conflict with Law (hereinafter

referred to as CICL) has filed this bail application
submitting therein that the Applicant/CICL came to be
arrested in connection with FIR No. 08/2022 for the
alleged commission of offences falling under Section 326-
A read with 120-B IPC by Police Station Nowhatta. The
Applicant is a Child in Conflict with Law as defined by
the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 since at the time of the
alleged commission of the offence, the Applicant/CICL
had not attained majority. The Date of Birth certificate
issued by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation clearly
indicates that the date of birth of the Applicant/CICL is
20.09.2004. On 02.02.2022 the Applicant/CICL was
arrested by the personnel of the above mentioned Police
Station and since then the Applicant/CICL has been
languishing in Observation Home, Harwan, Srinagar. The
Principle of presumption of innocence is recognized as a
“fundamental principle” by the J.J Act, 2015 and
accordingly it shall be presumed that the Juvenile is
innocent of any malafide or criminal intent. Therefore,
the Applicant/CICL has a right to be treated in
accordance with this presumption. The Applicant/CICL is
a student and is studying in Class 8th and his studies are
getting marred because of continued incarceration. The
continuous confinement of the Applicant will be
detrimental to his studies. A chance to learn in person at
the school will create a favourable environment for the
Applicant/CICL, allowing for the Juvenile’s reformation
and recreation. Allowing the Applicant/CICL to be under
detention at this stage of the trial would be tantamount

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 3 of 15

to draining of what could be a good period of life for the

Applicant/CICL which could be used productively by the
Applicant/CICL. The motion of bail under JJ Act, 2015,
is very different from the bail as understood in Criminal
Law. The difference lies in the fact that the JJ Act, 2015
is child centric and is reformative. The object of the Act is
to rehabilitate and reform the CICL and not to penalize
him. Therefore, a chance should be given to the
Applicant/CICL to tread the way of becoming a model
citizen. There is no chance that if the Applicant/CICL is
released on bail, it will bring him in association with any
known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or
psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends
of justice. The family setting is best for the overall
development of the Juvenile. The welfare of the Juvenile
is of paramount importance and it can be best served
only when the Juvenile is placed in a friendly and caring
environment and this can only be provided by the family
of the Juvenile. The fundamental principles of the JJ Act,
2015 provide that detention pending trial should be used
only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest
possible period. Section 12 of the JJ Act, 2015 is worded
to meet the aforementioned philosophy ensuring that
children are released on bail at the earliest, irrespective
of the nature of the offence. The grant of bail is the rule,
and rejection, is exception. The Applicant/CICL belongs
to a family of modest means. The Applicant/CICL has no
prior criminal record nor has been previously convicted
for the commission of a cognizable offence. Therefore,
there arises the least possibility of the Applicant/CICL
committing similar or other offences. The Juvenile’s
parents are determined to provide him with the best
education possible as well as a nurturing atmosphere for
his professional and personal development. Granting of
bail by no stretch of interpretation means acquittal.
Rather the Board transfers the alleged accused from the

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 4 of 15

Custody of Law, momentarily, and entrusting the alleged

Applicant/CICL to the Custody of Sureties under the
esteemed supervision of the Hon’ble Board. And that the
sureties, thus become bound to produce the
Applicant/CICL before the Hon’ble Board to face trial.
The parents of the Juvenile are ready to abide by any
terms and conditions that may be imposed by the Board
while granting him bail under the supervision of his
parents. Lastly, prays the instant application be allowed.

2. The Ld. A.P.P Mr. Zaffar Iqbal Shaheen has filed the
objections which are part of the file. The Ld. A.P.P has
objected to the application on the grounds that the
Applicant/CICL is involved in the commission of a non-
bailable offence, hence cannot claim bail as a matter of
right. The Applicant/CICL is involved in the commission
of a heinous offence under Section 2 (33) JJ Act 2015.
Applicant/CICL has committed and actively aided in the
commission of this horrendous act which shows
depravity of mind and cannot be treated as an act which
can be dubbed as a child’s mistake during youth hood. It
is a ghastly act done with passion to ravish the life of the
victim. The Applicant/CICL if released would certainly
expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger
and it is pertinent to mention the fact that the rage in
society against the offender is simmering, so that the
physical safety of the Applicant/CICL is best possible at
the observation home as his release would expose him to
physical injury or even mob-lynching, which may be
carried by the relatives or friends of the victim or other
anti-social elements in the society who may take law in
their own hands. His release would also defeat the ends
of justice as the victims family would be psychologically
affected by the decision as they are already devastated by
the offence committed against the victim. Further, it
would embolden many other sick minded delinquents to

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 5 of 15

commit similar offences. The Applicant/CICL has lost

parental control and hence cannot be reformed or re-
integrated by way of parental care, love or attention.
Hence, his safety, reformation can be possible only if he
continues to be lodged at the reformative observation
home. Lastly prayed that the instant application be
rejected as the prosecution strongly opposes this
application in the interest of justice, equity, and public
order in the society at large.

3. Perused the final report of the case as same stands

presented before this Board on 22.02.2022. After
perusal of the final report, it transpires that
Investigating Officer has concluded that the offences
under Section 326-A, 120-B IPC are prima facie found
to be attributed against the CICL and presently the
case is listed before Board for the preliminary
assessment of CICL in accordance with the mandate
of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, in which next date of
hearing is 04.05.2022.

4. Legal Cum Probationary Officer (LCPO) Srinagar,

associated with District Child Protection Unit,
Srinagar has submitted Social Investigation Report
(SIR) of the CICL which is part of the file, which
transpires that the CICL was manipulated by main
culprit. He was accompanying the main culprit in this
case to the spot of commission of this offence. CICL and
main culprit were known to each other and on the day of
commission of offence main culprit namely Sajid asked
CICL to accompany him for committing the said grave
offence. He had tempted CICL that he would give new
clothes to him if he accompanied him to the spot of
incident and would throw acid on the victim. CICL denied
to throw the acid on the victim but agreed in
accompanying him (Sajid main Accused) to the place of

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 6 of 15

occurrence. Further, submits that CICL must go through

strict and proper rehabilitation. He must be kept under
stringent supervision.

5. Case History of CICL is submitted by Probation Officer

associated with Observation Home Harwan, Srinagar
wherein it has been found that CICL is presently living in
a nuclear family system. He is a student of 8th Standard.
Peer group influence, Parental neglect and lack of moral
and social education are the basic reasons for
delinquency of CICL. It appeared that CICL is in need of
proper counselling and guidance for the purpose of
becoming a good human being. Moreover, parents of the
CICL should also be given moral and ethical sessions so
that they can guide their child in a proper manner.

ARGUMENTS:-

6. Ld Counsel for the Applicant/CICL while arguing has

reiterated that there are reasonable grounds for believing
that the Applicant is innocent and is not guilty of such
offences as are alleged against him and that he is not
likely to commit any offence while on bail. The
continuous arrest/detention of the child, in view of his
tender age may not serve any useful purpose for his
growth, development and betterment. And that the
Applicant will appear before the board or any other court,
during pendency of the investigation/trial in the case and
that his guardian shall properly look after the delinquent
child and secure him away from the company of known
criminals. From a bare reading of the provision of Section
12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 i.e J. J Act, it
appears that the intention of the legislature is to grant
bail to the Juvenile irrespective of the nature of gravity of
the offence alleged to have been committed by him, and
bail can be declined only in such cases where reasonable

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 7 of 15

grounds are there for believing that the release is likely to

bring the Juvenile into association of any known criminal
or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger,
or that his release would defeat the ends of justice.
Meaning thereby, as per the aforesaid provision, a
Juvenile can be denied the concession of bail, if any of
the three contingencies specified under Section 12 (1) of
the J.J Act is available. In support of his arguments he
has cited (i). Jiya-Uddin (Minor) Thru. His.....Vs State
of U.P & Anr Criminal Revision No. 1234 of 2018, (ii).
Pradeep Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P
Criminal Appeal No. 3526 of 2018.

7. Learned APP for prosecution has also submitted that the

Hon’ble Board is to take into consideration the Social
Investigation Report prepared by the Probation Officer or
Child Welfare Officer or Social Worker within a period of
15 days from the 1st production of CICL before the Board
for ascertaining the circumstances in which the alleged
offence was committed by the CICL U/S 8(e). The object
being that solely rejecting a bail application on the basis
of police report should not be the only norm rather a
whole some view of the circumstances be taken into
consideration for deciding a bail application. The Hon’ble
Board should take into consideration, the third condition
for the denial of bail i.e release would defeat ends of
justice. Term “ends of justice” is not defined in the act. It
means preservation of a proper balance between
constitutional (statutory rights of an individual) and
rights of people at large to have law enforced. The Hon’ble
Board has also take into account the effect and impact of
grant of bail to the juveniles on the victims family in
particular and its adjoining society in general. This
offence being a heinous offence within the meaning of
Section 2 (33) and read with Section 15 of J.J. Act, the
CICL has to be subjected to preliminary assessment

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 8 of 15

under Section 15 (1) as the CICL is of 16 Years age and it

is important to ascertain his ability to understand the
consequences of the offence and must be decided under
Section 14(3). However the mentioned Section does not
put any rider on the grant or refusal of bail to the CICL.
The exception of heinous offence alleged to be committed
by the Juvenile of 16 Years of age and above upto 18
Years, with mature, mental facility has been carved out
in the J.J Act of 2015. The earlier J.J Act of 2000 was not
carrying any such exception regarding the age of
Juvenile, which was upto the age of 18 Years. This
exception of 16-18 Years was created after the shameful
happening of Nirbhaya case in the capital of the country
as a whole. As one of the accused in the said case had
claimed to be juvenile and escaped the adequate
punishment only on account of juvenility, though he was
mentally and physically mature. Hence it is humbly
submitted that the instant bail application be rejected in
the interest of justice.

8. Heard and Considered.

FINDINGS:-

9. The Board perused the Bail Application, Final Report,

Objections filed by the Ld. APP, perused the entire record
as well as considered the rival arguments advanced by
the Ld Counsel for the Applicant and Ld. APP. Perused
Social Investigation Report (SIR), Case History of the
CICL prepared by Probation Officers. Besides, by the way
interpretation of the law on the subject by the Hon’ble
Apex Court and various other Hon’ble High Courts of our
country in catena of judgments have laid down, that the
following material consideration which the Courts/
Boards should keep in mind while granting/refusing bail
in non-bailable offences to Juveniles:-

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 9 of 15

 That the Board must duly consider the nature

and circumstances of the case;
 That the liberty of the child must be balanced
against the larger interest of the society and
the state;
 That the nature of the charge is the vital
factor and the facts and circumstances play a
predominant role;
 That the rehabilitation/reformation to which
the child may be liable also bears upon the
matter;
 That the judicial discretion must be exercised
by the Board with utmost care and
circumstances;
 The peculiar facts and circumstances of the
case be considered;
 Social position or status of the CICL;
 Whether the grant of bail would thwart the
course of justice, or defeat the ends of justice?

10. Furthermore, Fundamental Principles of Care and

Protection of Children guaranteed under the Juvenile
Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 reads
as:
 That the child’s right to dignity and worth has
to be respected and protected throughout the
entire process of dealing with the child from
the first contact with law enforcement
agencies to the implementation of all
measures for dealing with the child.
 That in all the decisions taken within the
context of administration of juvenile justice,
the principle of best interest of the child shall
be the primary consideration.
 That all measures shall be taken to ensure
that the child is safe and is not subjected to
any harm, abuse or maltreatment while in
contact with the care and protection system,
and thereafter.
 That the child shall be placed in institutional
care as a step of last resort after making a
reasonable inquiry.

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 10 of 15

11. Tested against the backdrop of the totality of the

aforementioned governing principles, the peculiar facts
and circumstances of the case and considering the
welfare of the child, although admittedly the offences
attributed to the CICL are classified as heinous as per
the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2015, but the liberty of the children must be
balanced against the larger interest of the society and the
State, and bail to juvenile shall be norm and denial
exception that too if case falls within one of the
exceptions carved by Proviso to Section 12 (1) of JJ. Act,
2015.

12. The Board observed that from a bare reading of the

provisions of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care &
Protection of Children) Act, 2015, it appears that the
intention of the legislature is to grant bail to the children
irrespective of the nature or gravity of the offence alleged
to have been committed by him, and bail can be declined
only on reasonable grounds. A juvenile has to be
released on bail mandatorily unless and until the
exceptions carved out in proviso to Section 12(1) of
the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children)
Act, 2015 itself are made out. The exceptions are
noted being:-
 A reasonable ground for believing that the
release is likely to bring the juvenile into
association with any known criminal;
 His release is likely to expose him to any
moral, physical or psychological danger; and
 His release would defeat the ends of justice.

Meaning thereby, as per the aforesaid provision, a

juvenile can be denied the concession of bail, if any of
the three contingencies specified under Section 12(1)
of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children)
Act, 2015 is available.

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 11 of 15

13. Now, coming to the case under hand, the allegation (case
of prosecution) against the CICL is that Police Station
Nowhatta, Srinagar received an information through
reliable sources, that on 01.02.2022 at about 17:30
hours, some unknown person or persons threw acid over
the face of an unidentified girl at Usmania Colony
Wantpora, Nowhatta and after this attack, the unknown
Accused fled away from the spot. On receiving this
information, FIR Number 08/2022 under Section 326-A
was registered in Nowhatta Police station and
investigation was set into motion. During investigation it
came out that this was a well-planned criminal
conspiracy hatched between main Accused Sajid Altaf
Rather (A-1), and his associates namely Mohammad
Saleem Ali (A-2) and later with CICL. The conspiracy was
to teach a lesson and take revenge from the victim in this
case, as she had rejected marriage proposal of main
Accused namely Sajid Altaf Rather. In furtherance of this
conspiracy main Accused brought Sulphuric acid from
his associate namely Mohd Saleem Kumar and threw the
acid on the victim’s face while, his another associate
CICL accompanied him for this criminal act. During
course of investigation it was found that Accused, Sajid
Altaf also associated third Accused CICL in the
conspiracy, when he took him along to commit the act of
throwing acid on the face of the victim. The third Accused
CICL willingly accompanied the main Accused, Sajid Altaf
on Scooty by sitting in back seat. After the criminal Act,
he came back with the main Accused, Sajid on same
Scooty and got busy in routine works. His conduct post
the incident wherein he didn’t inform anyone about the
crime, also clearly points out that he was part of
conspiracy and execution of the criminal act in this case.
All the three Accused (A1, A2) and CICL were part of the
criminal conspiracy even though they may have joined
the conspiracy at different times but there was clear

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 12 of 15

meeting of minds. Further, the fact that all the three

Accused are residents of same locality and are well
known to each other since long reinforces this.
Investigation has fully established that the criminal act of
throwing acid on the face of victim was in furtherance of
conspiracy hatched by main Accused Sajid, in
association with Accused, Saleem and CICL. The motive
was to teach the victim a lesson as she had rejected
marriage proposal of Accused, Sajid Altaf Rather.

14. Bail in the instant case can be refused on the ground

that release of CICL at this juncture would certainly
defeat the ends of justice. Ends of Justice have been
interpreted by courts in different manner. No
universal formula can be laid down but justice to
society as a whole has to be borne in mind while
interpreting ends of justice. All that this Board
wishes to say is that for the present, the Board is
seized of this bail matter, there is a reasonable
assurance about the charge being prima facie
credible. It is true that the merits of the case or
prima facie tenability of the charge, like an adult, is
not entirely decisive to the fate of the bail plea. At
the same time, it is not altogether irrelevant. The
gravity of the charge, manner of its perpetration,
circumstances in which the offence is alleged to have
been committed, its immediate and not so immediate
impact on the society at large and the locality, in
particular, besides its impact on the aggrieved family,
are all matters to be taken into reckoning while
judging a juvenile’s bail plea. All these factors are
relevant under the last disentitling clause postulated
under the proviso to Section 12 (1) of the Act, which
says that release of the juvenile would ‘defeat the
ends of justice’. After all ‘defeat the ends of justice’ is
not a word of art. It has been thoughtfully introduced

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 13 of 15

by the legislature to arm the Board with a right to

overcome an otherwise absolute right to bail, where
in the totality of the circumstances, release on bail
would adversely impact the law and order and the
equilibrium of an ordered society.

15. Hon’ble Apex Court in Essa @ Anjum Abdul Razak

Memon Vs State of Maharashtra 2013 (13) SCC 456
has given a guidance as to what the term “Ends of
Justice” connotes. The relevant paras are reproduced
herein below:-

“374. It has always been the subject matter of

debate as what does the words “the ends of
justice” mean, for the reason “that it is one of
those questions to which the resigned wisdom
applies that man cannot find a definitive
answer, but can only try to improve the
question”. (Vide: L. Vijay Kumar vs. Public
Prosecutor, A.P., AIR 1978 SC 1485).

375. In Delhi Development Authority vs. Skipper

Construction Co. (P) Ltd. and Another, AIR 1996
SC 2005, this Court observed that it is advisable
to leave the power undefined and uncatalogued,
so that it remains elastic enough to be moulded
to suit the given situation.

376. While dealing with such an issue, the

court must not lose sight of the fact that
meaning of “ends of justice” essentially refers to
justice to all the parties. This phrase refers to
the best interest of the public within the four
corners of the statute. In fact, it means
preservation of proper balance between the
Constitutional/Statutory rights of an individual
and rights of the people at large to have the law
enforced. The “ends of justice” does not mean
vague and indeterminate notions of justice, but
justice according to the law of the land. (Vide:
State Bank of Patiala & Ors. vs. S.K. Sharma,
AIR 1996 SC 1669; and Mahade Vs Govind
Gharge & Ors. vs. The Special Land Acquisition

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 14 of 15

Officer, Upper Krishna Project, Jamkhandi,

Karnataka, (2011) 6 SCC 321)

377. Thus, the law has to be interpreted in such

a manner that it develops coherently in
accordance with the principles, so as to serve,
even-handedly, the Ends of Justice”.

16. In the instant case alleged act of Applicant/CICL

wherein he accompanied the main Accused to commit
the alleged crime and post occurrence behaviour of
Applicant/CICL, all point out to the fact that CICL
needs reformation of highest degree so as to make
him understand that the norms of society and laws of
land are to be adhered to. The release at this juncture
of CICL on bail will not serve the ends of justice.
Rather, his placement at Observation Home, Harwan,
Srinagar is in his best interest at this juncture as he
has shown signs of reformation which shall continue
for the time being.

CONCLUSION:-

17. So coming to the conclusion, the Board is not

inclined to grant bail to the Applicant/CICL at this
stage. Taking into the considerations the nature and
gravity of allegations and overall circumstances,
Board is of the opinion that release at this stage of
CICL on bail would certainly defeat the Ends of
Justice. Accordingly the instant bail application is
dismissed and shall be attached with Final Report of
the instant case.

18. Any observation made hereinabove shall be confined

to the disposal of this bail application and shall not
have any bearing on the enquiry pending before the
Board with regard to the Applicant/CICL which will
always be conducted in accordance with the General

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.
 Page 15 of 15

Principles of Care and Protection of Children as

envisaged under Section 3 of Juvenile Justice Act,
2015. Disposed off.

Announced
20.04.2022
***Obaid***

Touseef Ahmad Magray (Author)

Principal Magistrate

I, Concur. I, Concur.

Dr. Khair Ul Nisa Dr. Asima Hassan

Member Member

____________________________________________________________________
File No. 126/JJB/SGR Mr. ABC (Name with held) Vs U.T of J & K P/S Nowhatta, Sgr.