A Delhi court has granted anticipatory bail to a juvenile under section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in the wake of conflicting judgments of different High Courts of the country.
The bail was filed on behalf of the defence by Advocate Harpreet Singh Hora assisted by Advocate Akanksha Rai.
The FIR was filed under Sections 356(Assault or criminal force in attempt to commit theft), 323(Voluntarily causing hurt), 379(Punishment for Theft), 506(Criminal Intimidation), 34(Common Intention) of IPC against the minor (name withheld) in Pashchim Vihar east police station.
It was pointed out through high court precedents that there is no exclusion of granting the benefit of anticipatory bail to a child in conflict with the law as the said benefit under Section 438 CrPC is available to “any person”. Different high courts have however held divergent views in the matter of anticipatory bail as the Juvenile Justice Act doesn’t mention it.
It was further argued that the wordings of section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act deals with post-arrest provisions and the non-obstante clause in section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act shall not operate to exclude the pre-arrest bail provisions for the juvenile. The lawyer for the accused juvenile also argued that considering the law laid down in the judgement of Supreme court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1632), liberty for a person is to be held as a sacrosanct right.
While granting interim protection from arrest, the court clarified that once the child in conflict with law is produced before the Juvenile Justice Board, the bail matter will be dealt by the Board under Section 10 and 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
Read the order here
— India Legal Bureau