Bail Applications Of Child In Conflict With Law Can’t Be Dealt With Like Crimes Committed By Adults, JJB & Children’s Court Must Give Reasons: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has observed that both the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) and the Children’s Court required to give the reasons explaining as to how the release of the Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) would be detrimental to the ends of justice.

The Court observed that both the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) and the Children’s Court had erroneously treated the bail plea as if they were dealing with a heinous crime committed by an adult.

​The Bench of Justice Gita Gopi observed, “The JJB as well as the learned Appellate Court was required to give the reasons explaining as to how the release of the CCL would be detrimental to the ends of justice. Even without calling for the Report of the Probation Officer and the Report of the Clinical Psychologist, the bail application of the present CCL, aged about 14 years has been dealt with. Both the Courts, i.e. learned JJB as well as the learned Appellate Court has dealt with the application for bail of the present CCL as if they were dealing with of a heinous crime committed by an adult.”

Advocate AN Pathan appeared for the Applicant, while Addl. PP Bhargav Pandya appeared for the Respondents.

Factual Background

The applicant, a Child in Conflict with Law (CCL) aged approximately 13 years, preferred the present revision application through his father under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The applicant sought to quash and set aside the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Children’s Court, Surat, in Criminal Appeal.

Furthermore, the prayer extended to the setting aside of the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), Surat, in a Criminal Miscellaneous Application. These orders arose in connection with the First Information Report (FIR) registered at Bhestan Police Station, alleging offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2)(A) and 52 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. The applicant essentially prayed for the grant of regular bail and the quashing of the orders.

Submissions by the Applicant

The applicant highlighted that the five involved children were of tender age, ranging from ten to thirteen years, while the deceased was sixteen. It was submitted that the parties were friends residing in the same locality and that no eyewitnesses existed to the incident. Referring to the police report, it was argued that the deceased had subjected the children to persistent and grave harassment, including physical assault, indecent exposure, and vulgar verbal abuse regarding their families. It was submitted that the applicant was alleged to have inflicted only three of the twenty-three injuries recorded, suggesting the incident arose from prolonged provocation.

Submissions by the State and the Complainant

The State relied on CCTV footage and the brutality of the injuries described in the post-mortem report. It was contended that the applicant’s continued detention in an Observation Home was necessary for behavioral correction. Supplementing this, the complainant argued that the murder was a pre-planned act where the deceased was lured to the site under false pretexts. It was asserted that the applicant inflicted fatal blows on vital organs, demonstrating significant mental culpability and a lead role in the brutal assault, and thus prayed for the rejection of the application.

Observations of the Court

The Court observed, “This Court has dealt in detail with the criteria to be taken into consideration while dealing with the CCL. In light of the judgment of the Child in Conflict with law v. State of Gujarat dated 15.09.2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.1024 of 2023, it is requested to the learned JJB’s and the Children’s Court to be sensitive while they are dealing with the bail application of CCL’s below the age of 16 even in heinous crimes. Random rejection of the bail application is not warranted by the President of JJB as well the Appellate Court since the bail application have to be dealt with under Section 12 of the JJ Act and not in accordance with the provisions of Cr.P.C., i.e. under Sections 437 or 439 of Cr.P.C.”

It also said that it was clear that the deceased was continuously bullying the CCL’s. There was no eyewitness to the incident, which had taken place during the day. The mental capability and mental state of the CCL’s understanding of the consequences of their act have not been addressed by the JJB, as well as the Children’s Court, of a child aged about 14 years, the Court added.

Accordingly, the Court allowed the revision application and released the Applicant on regular bail. The Court also directed the Probation Officer to monitor the conduct of the CCL and to submit a quarterly report before the JJB till completion of the trial.

Cause Title: XXXX v. State of Gujarat And Others [Neutral Citation: 2026:GUJHC:24178]

Appearances:

Applicant: Advocate AN Pathan and Advocate AA Zabuawala.

Respondents: Additional Public Prosecutor Bhargav Pandya, Advocate Sahil Y Patel, Advocate Tahir M Khan.

Click here to read/download the Order