Gujarat High Court
Juvenile Kishanbhai Bhikhabhai Dabhi … vs State Of Gujarat on 21 April, 2026
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 73 of
2026
================================================================
JUVENILE KISHANBHAI BHIKHABHAI DABHI (THAKOR) THRO
MADHUBEN DARSHILBHAI THAKOR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR PIYUSH TRIVEDI with MR NAYANKUMAR V SHUKLA(10184) for the
Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR ROHAN H RAVAL, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 21/04/2026
ORDER
1) RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives
service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent-
State.
2) The applicant herein the child in conflict with law (CCL)
aged about 17 years and 30 days, through his
grandmother, under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter
referred to in short as the ‘JJ Act‘) has made a prayer to
Page 1 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
quash and set aside the judgment and order dated
19.11.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge
(POCSO), Surendranagar, in Criminal Appeal No.234 of
2025 in connection with the First Information Report (FIR)
being C.R. No.11211035240330 of 2024 registered with
Muli Police Station, Surendranagar for the offences
punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(J)(K)(N) of
the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Sections 3(A), 4,
5(l), 5(j)(2), 6, 9 (L) and 12 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act‘),
and to release CCL on regular bail.
3) The allegations are to the effect that the victim girl, the
daughter of the complainant and is aged 14 years 5
months and 9 days was kidnapped by the CCL from the
legal guardianship of her parents under the pretext of
marrying her, who had taken her to various places,
stayed together with the victim girl, established physical
relations with her; the girl had become pregnant carrying
pregnancy for a period of 5 months.
4) This Court had called for the DNA Report since the victim
Page 2 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
had undergone medical termination of pregnancy. The
DNA Report matches and declares the CCL to be the
biological father.
5) Learned advocate for the CCL Mr. Piyush Trivedi
submitted that the Report of the Probation Officer would
require a special consideration since the CCL had
reported to the Probation Officer that an amount of
Rs.2,00,000/- was given in the presence of the members
of the community for the engagement and thereafter,
they both were visiting each other’s houses and were on
talking terms. It is further submitted that one day the
victim girl had informed the CCL that her parents were
harassing her thus, she had threatened that if the CCL
would not come and take her away, she would commit
suicide. It is also submitted that thereafter, the CCL and
the victim both ran away from the house. It is submitted
that the CCL had also expressed his opinion before the
Probation Officer that in view of his engagement with the
victim girl, the parents of the victim girl ought not to
have filed a case against him. Further, placing reliance
on the Report of the Probation Officer, it is submitted
Page 3 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
that it was only on the insistence of the victim girl, the
CCL had to elope with her. Considering all the above
aspects, it is submitted that this Court may exercise
discretion in favour of the CCL.
6) The Report of the Probation Officer suggests that from
the tone of speaking, the CCL was found to be normal,
self-oriented about the place, time, date and other
things. His social understanding was also sharp and was
also having an understanding of the entire situation.
7) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent-State Mr. Rohan H. Raval submitted that the
CCL had a very clear understanding about the social
repercussions and he also knew about the consequences
of his own act, that itself would prove his mental and
physical capacity of understanding the situation. The
involvement of the present CCL is clearly reflected on
record and therefore, submitted that the order passed by
the Appellate Court is proper and urged that the present
application be rejected and no discretion be exercised in
favour of the CCL.
Page 4 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
8) The statement relied on by learned advocate for the CCL
Mr. Piyush Trivedi suggests that the victim girl had
travelled with the CCL, had stayed with him at several
places for about 7-8 months. The statement under
Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short
‘Cr.P.C.’) would reveal that the victim girl makes some
reference about Rs.2,00,000/- being paid to her parents
for the engagement. There is no further investigation
from the side of the police to this contention which has
been raised under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. about the
statement of the victim girl.
9) Having considered the Report of the Probation Officer as
well as the fact that the victim girl stayed with the CCL
for about 7-8 months, the application deserves to be
allowed.
10) At this stage, it would be appropriate to refer to 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
Page 5 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
28.04.2022), it has been observed as under:
“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 while 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 personPage 6 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
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 not applicable on the issue of
grant or denial of bail to a child alleged to have
Page 7 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
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.”
11) The case of Barun Chandra Thakur Vs. Master Bholu
& Anr., in Criminal Appeal No.950 of 2022, was declared
on 13.07.2022 [(2023) 12 SCC 401]. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court while dealing with section 15 of the J.J.
Act for preliminary assessment of child in conflict with
law, observed as under :-
“65. While considering a child as an adult one
needs to look at his/her physical maturity,
cognitive abilities, social and emotional
competencies. It must be mentioned here that
from a neurobiological perspective, the
development of cognitive, behavioural attributes
like the ability to delay gratification, decision
making, risk taking, impulsivity, judgement, etc.
continues until the early 20s. It is, therefore, all
the more important that such assessment is
made to distinguish such attributes between a
child and an adult.
66. Cognitive maturation is highly dependent on
hereditary factors. Emotional development is less
likely to affect cognitive maturation. However, if
emotions are too intense and the child is unable
to regulate emotions effectively, then intellectual
insight/knowledge may take a back seat.
70. A child with average intelligence/IQ will have
the intellectual knowledge of the consequences
of his actions. But whether or not he is able to
control himself or his actions will depend on his
level of emotional competence. For example,
risky driving may result in an accident. But if
emotional competence is not high, the urge forPage 8 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
thrill seeking may get the better of his intellectual
understanding.
71. Children may be geared towards more
instant gratification and may not be able to
deeply understand the long-term consequences
of their actions. They are also more likely to be
influenced by emotion rather than reason.
Research shows that young people do know risks
to themselves. Despite this knowledge,
adolescents engage in riskier behaviour than
adults (such as drug and alcohol use, unsafe
sexual activity, dangerous driving and/or
delinquent behaviour). While they do consider
risks cognitively (by weighing up the potential
risks and rewards of a particular act), their
decisions / actions may be more heavily
influenced by social (e.g. peer influences) and/or
emotional (e.g. impulsive) tendencies. In addition,
the lack of experience coupled with the child’s
limited ability to deeply understand the long-term
consequences of their actions can lead to
impulsive / reckless decision making.”
12) The judgment and order dated 19.11.2025 passed by the
learned Special Judge (POCSO), Surendranagar, in
Criminal Appeal No.234 of 2025 and the order of JJB
rejecting bail is set aside.
13) In the result, the present CCL is ordered to be released
on regular bail in connection with the aforesaid FIR, upon
his grandmother executing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with a surety of
the like amount before the JJB.
Page 9 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/73/2026 ORDER DATED: 21/04/2026
undefined
14) It is directed that the Probation Officer shall monitor the
conduct of the CCL and shall quarterly submit the report
before the JJB till completion of the trial. Moreover, if the
Probation Officer considers any necessity of sending the
child for any behavior modification then necessary
therapy and psychiatric support be provided to the CCL .
14.1. The grandmother of the juvenile to ensure that the
juvenile will not fall into bad company.
15) Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted. Registry to communicate this order
to the concerned Court/authority by Fax or Email
forthwith.
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J)
CAROLINE / SB-II # 1
Page 10 of 10
Uploaded by CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212) on Wed Apr 22 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 23 03:42:13 IST 2026
