Punjab and Haryana High Court takes divergent views on pre-arrest bail to juvenile

Saurabh Malik
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, July 27

The Punjab and Haryana High Court, it seems, has been taking divergent views on grant of pre-arrest bail to a juvenile. While the Bench has, in some cases, held that pre-arrest bail plea by a juvenile is not maintainable, the High Court has, in its latest judgment, ruled that the legislature has no intention of debarring a juvenile from seeking relief.

Justice HS Madaan was hearing a pre-arrest bail petition by a minor through his mother against Haryana. The question was whether there was a specific bar on the filing of pre-arrest bail plea under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.

The petitioner’s counsel stated that the High Court had, in some cases, taken the view that pre-arrest bail plea by a juvenile was not maintainable and such judgments were mentioned in an order passed by the Sirsa Additional Sessions Judge. The High Court had been granting relief thereafter. In an attempt to buttress his contentions, the counsel quoted at least four judgments.

The complainant’s counsel referred to more than seven judgments to contend that it was not maintainable, a stand supported by the state counsel. Holding the petition to be maintainable, Justice Madaan asserted that the Act was a piece of social welfare legislation enacted to take care of children’s welfare and to prevent them from turning into hardened criminals.

“An inference can certainly not be drawn that the legislature intended to debar a juvenile from seeking relief of pre-arrest bail. If it was also, a specific provision in that regard would have been there on analogy of Section 18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. It could certainly not be the intention of the legislature that such juvenile should be first apprehended and then produced before the Juvenile Justice Board, in the process denying relief to a juvenile which is available to other persons accused of heinous offences,” Justice Madaan observed.