Court refuses bail to juvenile, says he is habitual offender

Thursday, Oct 15, 2015,16:59 IST By metrovaartha A A A

New Delhi | A juvenile, allegedly involved in 13 criminal cases including theft and house trespass, was denied bail by a Delhi court which said he cannot be released from reformation home as he was a habitual offender. The court dismissed the minor offender’s appeal filed against the order of juvenile justice board (JJB) which had refused to grant him bail saying he may again misuse the liberty by indulging in such offences.
The appellant (juvenile) was involved in 13 previous involvements and is an admitted fact that (he) was also found involved in the offences. There are thus reasonable grounds to believe that the release of the appellant on bail would defeat the ends of justice as he seems to be a habitual offender and may misuse the liberty of bail again by indulging in commission of offences.
The JJB-II has infact also expressed its anguish by mentioning in the impugned order that they had lost the number of counts of the incidents of burglary wherein the appellant was found to be involved and that every time he comes out on bail he commits the same offence again, Additional Sessions Judge Amit Bansal.
The court said there was no illegality in order of JJB which rightly dismissed the 17-year-old juvenile’s bail application as his release would have defeated the ends of justice and there was no merits in his appeal. According to the police, the minor was apprehended from R K Puram area in July this year on the allegations that he along with his associates trespassed and committed theft at Karnataka staff quarters here. He was produced before the JJB and was sent to children’s home.
A laptop, five mobile phones, two handicams, Rs 50,000 case and two kg silver articles were stolen by him, it said. The juvenile sought bail claiming that he was falsely implicated in the case and the alleged recovery was also planted. He said he was residing with his family and there was no chance that he would come in contact with bad company.
The court, however, said prima facie his involvement was there as his mobile phone was found from the spot following which he was apprehended and some stolen articles were also recovered at his instance from his room.