Gujarat High Court
Shravan @ Gopal Rajeshbhai Vasava Thro … vs State Of Gujarat on 27 March, 2026
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/405/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 405 of
2025
==========================================================
SHRAVAN @ GOPAL RAJESHBHAI VASAVA THRO RAJESHKUMAR
BABUBHAI VASAVA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR GAJENDRA P BAGHEL(2968) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SHAMBHUKUMAR(13426) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR BHARGAV PANDYA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 27/03/2026
ORDER
1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives
service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent – State.
2. The revision application under Section 102 of the
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
(herein after referred to as ‘the Juvenile Justice Act‘),
challenges the order dated 12.02.2025 passed in Criminal
Appeal No.83 of 2025 in connection with FIR being C.R. No.
Part-A-11210050241188/2024 under Sections 103(2), 189(1)
(4), 190, 191(1)(3), 115 of B.N.S.S. and Section 135 of the
G.P. Act before the Rander Police Station, by Additional
Sessions Judge, Surat.
3. Learned advocate Mr.Gajendra Baghel submitted that
the present child in conflict with law is 17 years 2 months and
at the time of the offence he was 16 years 9 months and 10
Page 1 of 6
Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Mar 30 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 21:49:42 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/405/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026
undefined
days, has not been named in the FIR and the FIR itself is
ambiguous. Mr. Baghel stated that Section 103 of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which is for the punishment
of murder and other allied sections are invoked against all the
childs in conflict with law, which are six in number.
3.1 Learned advocate Mr. Baghel submitted that the
deceased was aged about 24 years and the allegation is that
all the children in conflict with law by unlawful assembly for
unknown reason had verbal quarrel with the deceased and
they all had given kick and fist blows to the deceased, and one
person, who has not been named in the complaint, has alleged
to have given a blow with the knife at the left side of
deceased. Advocate Mr. Baghel stated that all the children in
conflict with law were alleged to have fled away from the
place.
3.2 Learned advocate Mr. Baghel submitted that all the co-
children in conflict with law have been granted bail under
Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act by the J.J.B.. Advocate
Mr. Baghel submitted that there is nothing on record to say
that the present child in conflict with law was having knife in
his hand and he was the person, who had inflicted the blow.
Mr. Baghel stated that the said allegation would be the
primary allegation, which could not have gone unnoticed even
by the police at the relevant time, thus stated that he would
have been named in the FIR on the basis of the alleged
statement of the co-child in conflict with law, had it been so.
Page 2 of 6
Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Mar 30 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 21:49:42 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/405/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026
undefined
4. Probation Officer’s report has been called for, which is
on record. Learned APP Mr. Bhargav Pandya relying on the
report of Police Inspector Rander Police Station Surat City,
submitted that if the child is released on bail, then there are
all possibilities of threatening the witnesses and even all
possibilities of running away and avoiding the trial and falling
in bad company.
5. Having considered the facts of the case. The present
applicant – child in conflict with law has not been named in
the complaint, further the deceased was aged about 24 years,
the reason for the verbal quarrel could not be gathered and
what role the deceased himself had played against all the
children in conflict with law does not become clear from the
complaint. Probation Officer’s report does not disclose the
cause of the quarrel between the children in conflict with law,
with the deceased aged about 24 years. What was the reason
for the children in conflict with law to come together and
resist the deceased, has not been made clear by the
prosecution.
6. Probation Officer’s report suggests that there are earlier
cases of theft registered against the present applicant – child
in conflict with law. The Probation Officer has not stated as to
what counselling had been done for the child in connection
with the offences of theft. The economic condition of the
family does not appear to be sound, the father is suffering
from T.B., the mother is doing domestic work. The
background as well as the fact does not disclose the cause of
Page 3 of 6
Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Mar 30 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 21:49:42 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/405/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026
undefined
the quarrel, nor does disclose the name of the applicant in the
FIR.
7. In the case of Child in Conflict with Law Through
Savitaben Vitthalbhai Vasava Vs. State of Gujarat, 2022
(0) AIJEL-HC 244005 (passed in CRRA No.901 of 2021 on
28.04.2022)
17. Section 12 of the JJ Act, 2015 which deals with the
grant of bail to a child expressly contains the
nonobstante phrase to be as “…. notwithstanding
anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being
in force, be released on bail …”. This very provision in
Section 12 clarifies that provisions of Cr.PC is
excluded in the case of bail plea of the child. Further,
it requires to be noted that Section 12 is a specific
provision under the special statute that deals with the
matter of bail and accordingly, the application of
Section 439 of the Cr.PC is also necessarily excluded.
Cr.PC contains a corresponding clause which is for
application on special lines. Considering this aspect in
case of a bail application on behalf a child, it would be
required to be concluded that such bail plea would not
be maintable under Section 439 of Cr.PC.
19. Non-applicability of Section 439 of Cr.PC in case of
child in conflict with law has been appreciated by
various High Courts. This Court would like to refer to
the decision of the High Court of Delhi in the case of
CCL ‘A’ v. State (NCT of Delhi) in Bail Application
No.2510/2020 (dated 19.10.2020), where the Court
had observed as under :-
“44. In formulating the above position, this court finds
support in the view taken by the Division Bench of the
Chhattisgarh High Court in Tejram Nagrachi Juvenile
vs. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Station House
Officer4, where the Division Bench has opined that an
application for grant of bail under section 437 Cr.P.C.
or 439 Cr.P.C. would not be maintainable in the case of
a juvenile. The relevant paras of the judgment are as
under:
“7. A conjoint analysis of the provisions contained in
Sections 437 and 439 of the Code viz a viz Sections 8,
10 and 12 of the Act, 2015 would discern that whilePage 4 of 6
Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Mar 30 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 21:49:42 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.RA/405/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026
undefined
there are certain general guidelines under Sections
437 & 439 of the Code, power in respect of grant of
bail to a juvenile is more liberal in the nature of
command under Section 12(1) that whenever an
apparent juvenile alleged to have committed a bailable
or nonbailable offence is detained by the police or
appears or brought before a Board, such person shall,
notwithstanding anything contained in the Code or in
any other law for the time being in force, be released
on bail with or without surety or placed under the
supervision of a probation officer or under the care of
any fit person. The only rider for not releasing the
apparent juvenile is that whenever there appears
reasonable grounds for believing that the release is
likely to bring that person (Juvenile) into association
with any known criminal or expose the said person to
moral, physical or psychological danger or his release
would defeat the ends of justice, the Board shall record
the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances
that led to such a decision. This rider as contained in
proviso to Section 12(1) requires the Board to record
reasons for denying the bail. It would mean that
ordinarily the bail is to be allowed to a juvenile. The
denial being exceptional on certain reasons to be
recorded by the Board as provided in the proviso. This
special provision is not contained under Section 439 of
the Code.
“8. ………. While there is no denial of the fact that when
the Court of Sessions exercises appellate power under
Section 101(2) and the High Court exercises revisional
power under Section 102 of the Act of 2015, it shall
exercise power of the Board provided under Section
8(2), but this power of the Board would also be
available to the Court of Sessions or to the High Court
when it proceeds to examine the plea of juvenile for
grant of bail whenever such occasion arises on account
of bail application of juvenile being rejected under
Section 12 of the Act of 2015. Therefore, by use of the
term “otherwise” in Section 8(2), jurisdiction under
Section 439 of the Code would not be attracted which
is otherwise excluded by use of the term
“notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other
law for the time being in force”, as occurring in
Section 12 (1).” (emphasis supplied)
20. The law therefore, is clear on the aspect that since
Section 12 of the JJ Act bears a non-obstante clause
which indicates legislative intent that the source of
power to grant bail under the JJ Act, 2015 is
independent from that of the Cr.PC. Thus, it can be
said to be concluded that Section 439 of the Cr.PC is
Page 5 of 6
Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Mar 30 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 21:49:42 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/405/2025 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026
undefined
not applicable on the issue of grant or denial of bail to
a child alleged to have committed bailable or non-
bailable offence who is to be dealt with by the Special
Statute, i.e. JJ Act, 2015 which contains the specific
provision for bail under Section 12 of JJ Act, 2015.”
8. In the result, the present application succeeds and is
allowed. The child in conflict with law is ordered to be
released on bail in connection with C.R. No.Part-A-
11210050241188/2024 registered with Rander Police Station
on the applicant’s father executing a personal bond in sum of
Rs.10,000/-.
9. It is directed that the Probation Officer shall monitor the
conduct of the child in conflict with law and shall quarterly
submit the report before the concerned Board/Children’s
Court till completion of the trial. Moreover, if the Probation
Officer considers any necessity of sending the juvenile for any
behavior modification then necessary therapy and psychiatric
support be provided to the child in conflict with law.
10. The parents of the juvenile to ensure that child in
conflict with law will pursue his academic career, as father
has undertook the responsibility of the child in conflict with
law that he would take care of the child and for the
betterment of his future, he would make him appear for the
standard-10 examination.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Pankaj/129
Page 6 of 6
Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Mon Mar 30 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 21:49:42 IST 2026
[ad_1]
Source link
