Gujarat High Court
Sanjay Santosh Kokre Through Savita … vs State Of Gujarat on 27 April, 2026
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR BAIL) NO. 1059
of 2026
==========================================================
SANJAY SANTOSH KOKRE THROUGH SAVITA SANTOSH KOKRE
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAFIK LOKHANDWALA(5590) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 27/04/2026
ORDER
1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of the
respondent – State.
2. The Child in Conflict with Law, who is aged about 17 years 3
months and 12 days (hereinafter referred to as “CCL”),
through his mother, has filed an application under Section
102 read with Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as
“JJ Act“) challenging the order dated 27.1.2026 passed by the
learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Surat in
Criminal Juvenile Appeal no. 15 of 2026 (Juvenile Case no.
393 of 2025) in connection with FIR bearing CR no. Part-A
11214042251330 of 2025 registered with Olpad Police
Station, Surat Rural for the offence punishable under Sections
103(1), 54, 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and
Page 1 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act, and to release CCL on
regular bail.
3. As per the case, FIR was filed against unknown person while
the police during the investigation found that the deceased
father was beating the mother of the CCL and therefore, CCL
has brought his mother from Maharashtra to Surat and
therefore, the deceased had verbally quarreled on the mobile
phone and had threatened to beat and therefore, CCL had
given an application before the Chok Bazar Police Station,
Surat City and in connection with the application, the
deceased was attending the Police Station to give his
statement and in the meantime, the deceased and the CCL
met. It is stated that two co-accused who are the relatives
and the present CCL took the deceased to isolated place and
it is alleged that under conspiracy has killed the father of the
CCL. As per the police, on 22.7.2025 early morning, the
deceased has come to Surat and the accused, in execution of
the plan, took auto rickshaw of the accused – Dhanaji son of
Ramchandra Mutthu Kharat, wherein accused – Sunil Dilip
Patil was made to drive the rickshaw and the CCL himself and
the deceased sat in the rickshaw and accused – Dhanaji son
of Ramchandra Mutthu Kharat had followed them in another
Page 2 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
rented rickshaw and all headed towards three cross lanes
towards Ashapura Mata Temple, Taluka Olpad, District Surat,
where they stopped the rickshaw and at that time, there was
quarrel and it was alleged that the accused – Dhanaji son of
Ramchandra Mutthu Kharat gave a blow with the wooden log
and CCL who had brought the knife along with him have given
the blow on the neck and thus, caused death of his own
father.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Lokhandwala submitted that the act of
the CCL could always be considered as a nature of self-
defence as he was protecting his own mother, and further
stated that the complaint was given by Ravindra Ramchandra
Mutthu Kharat and as per the complaint, when the deceased
was lying, there was watch as well as one black colour cover
for the knife and stated that there is no eye witness to the
incident though the incident had taken place in an open area.
5. Countering the arguments, Mr. Pranav Dhagat, learned APP
has submitted that CCL was carrying knife with him and thus,
the very intention of the CCL was to murder his father, the
CCL was accompanied by two others and thus, stated that the
CCL was knowing about the consequences of his own act and
the very conduct of the CCL shows that he has the maturity to
Page 3 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
understand the nature of his offence.
6. The admitted fact that remains that the CCL was displeased
with the cruelty of his father towards his mother. He had even
given the police complaint and according to the police, the
deceased had come down for giving his statement and
parallelly the police has made the case of conspiracy. Under
the given circumstances, the co-accused as relatives and the
CCL were traveling along with the deceased and the facts of
the case suggest that the deceased had traveled along with all
of them and quarrel took place and at that time, the co-
accused had given a blow to the deceased with wooden log.
What were the circumstances under which the quarrel took
place and how the deceased reacted to the quarrel and was
defending himself during this quarrel against his father has
not come on record.
7. The report of the Probation Officer shows that the father was
a drunkard and was also mentally ill and while there is no any
criminal antecedents of the CCL and he was found to be
staying with other children in the observation home
peacefully.
8. This Court had an occasion to deal with the bail application of
Page 4 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
a CCL and while granting bail, this Court had an occasion to
deal with the provisions of Section 12 of the Act and had
explicitly laid down that Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. would not
be applicable on the issue of grant or denial of bail to a child
alleged to have committed bailable or non-bailable offence
which is dealt with by the special statute i.e. Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which contains
specific provision for bail under Section 12 of the Act. In the
case of Child in Conflict with Law Through Savitaben
Vitthalbhai Vasava v. State of Gujarat, 2022 (0) AIJEL-HC
244005 (passed in CRRA no.901 of 2021 on 28.04.2022), it
has been observed as under:-
“15. Explanation to Section 15 of the JJ Act,
2015 stipulates that in case of a heinous
offence alleged to have been committed by a
child, who has completed or is above the age
of sixteen years, the Board shall conduct a
preliminary assessment with regard to his
mental and physical capacity to commit such
offence, ability to understand the consequence
of the offence and the circumstances in which
he allegedly committed the offence and then
may pass an order in accordance with the
provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 18.
Thus, the whole endeavour of the JJ Act, 2015
is to protect a child in conflict with law from the
path of destruction and being a menace to the
Society. The object is reformative and not
retributive.
16. Now, under these circumstances upon
preliminary assessment made by the JJ BoardPage 5 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
under Section 15(2) of the JJ Act, 2015 and
when the need is found for the trial of the child
as an adult and his case is ordered to be
transferred to the Children’s Court, the
relevant consideration would be whether the
child in conflict with law de-jure become an
adult to be treated as a child in the subsequent
proceedings and thus the question would be
whether the application for bail would be
maintainable in the High Court under Section
439 for the child in conflict with law, who is
sent for trial before the Children’s Court or
whether the application for bail should be
considered under Section 12 of the JJ Act.
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.
18. The order under Section 18(3) of the JJ
Act transferring the trial of the case to the
Children’s Court would not declare the child as
an adult. Child in conflict with law is defined
under Section 2(13) of the JJ Act, 2015 to
mean a child who has not completed 18 years
as on date of the commission of the offence.
19. Non-applicability of Section 439 of Cr.PC
Page 6 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
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 non-bailable 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 bailPage 7 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
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 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.”
Page 8 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1059/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/04/2026
undefined
9. In this background of the matter having observed the
Probation Officer’s report, the present application is allowed.
The Child in Conflict with Law is ordered to be released on bail
in connection with the FIR bearing CR no. Part-A
11214042251330 of 2025 registered with Olpad Police
Station, Surat Rural on the applicant’s mother executing a
personal bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- each (Rupees ten
thousand only) with surety of like amount before the
Children’s Court with a condition that mother would take care
of her child for his good behaviour and his well being.
10. It is directed that the Probation Officer shall monitor the
conduct of the CCL 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 CCL for any behaviour modification,
then necessary therapy and psychiatric support be provided
to the CCL.
11. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Direct service is
permitted.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Maulik
Page 9 of 9
Uploaded by MAULIK R. PANDYA(HC00205) on Mon Apr 27 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 27 23:52:15 IST 2026
