19/06/2025
دفعہ 6(3) JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT 2018 کے مطابق نابالغ(18 سال سال سے کم عمر) ملزم کیلیے سات سال تک سزا والے جرائم قابل ضمانت ہیں اور ضمانت کی اس رعایت کا اطلاق نہ صرف ضمانت بعد از گرفتاری بلکہ ضمانت قبل از گرفتاری پر بھی ہوگا
PLD 2024 Lahore 702
Crl. Misc. No. 78015/CB/2023 Manzoor Ahmad Vs Muhammad Umar Farooq etc.
Section 6(1) of the JJSA provides that a juvenile accused of a bailable offence shall be released by the Juvenile Court on bail unless it appears that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the release of such juvenile may bring him in association with criminals or expose him to any other danger. In this situation, the juvenile shall be placed under the custody of a suitable person or Juvenile Rehabilitation Centre under the supervision of a probation officer. The juvenile shall not under any circumstances be kept in a police station under police custody or jail in such cases.
Section 6(3) of the Act provides for treating the “minor offences” (naeem)and “major offences” as bailable. Section 6(4) provides that where a juvenile is more than sixteen years of age and is arrested or detained for a heinous offence, he may be released on bail if the Juvenile Court is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds to believe that such juvenile is involved in the commission of a heinous offence. Even in cases involving heinous offences under section 6(5), the juvenile must be released on bail if he is under detention for a continuous period exceeding six months, his trial is not completed, and he is not responsible for the delay. The said period is to be counted from the date of the juvenile‟s arrest.
Section 23 of the JJSA provides that the provisions of this Act shall have overriding effect notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for (naeem)the time being in force. This means that if there are any inconsistencies or contradictions between the JJSA and other existing laws, the regulations specified within the JJSA will supersede and take precedence. Generally, if the provisions of the JJSA do not explicitly address a particular matter or are not inconsistent with the general law, i.e. the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, the latter may apply. Section 5(2) Cr.P.C. also supports this view. It provides that all offences under any law other than the PPC shall be investigated, inquired into, tried, and otherwise dealt with according to the provisions of the Code, but subject to any enactment for the time being in force regulating the manner or place of investigating, inquiring into, trying or otherwise dealing with such offence.
The JJSA does not explicitly mention anticipatory bail. However, following the legal principle discussed in the previous paragraph, this omission does not automatically prevent juveniles from pursuing it under the Code. A juvenile at risk of arrest can seek pre-arrest bail under section (naeem)498 Cr.P.C. This provision remains applicable and available to such offenders.
As adumbrated, section 6(3) of the JJSA mandates that it is to be treated as bailable. The Petitioner‟s contention is that the benefit of section 6(3) cannot be extended to the juvenile if he applies for pre-arrest bail. He argues that the words “arrested or detained” in section 6(3) denote that a juvenile must be in custody before section 6(3) can be applied to him. To put it differently, the benefit of this provision can only be granted to the juvenile when he seeks post-arrest bail.
The JJSA can be classified as both remedial and beneficial legislation. On the one hand, the Act aims to remedy deficiencies within the juvenile justice system by establishing procedures and standards for the treatment of juvenile offenders. It seeks to ensure that juveniles are treated fairly, provided with necessary support and services, and given opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration into society. In this sense, it is a “remedial legislation”. On the other hand, by prioritizing the rights and rehabilitation of juvenile offenders, the Act contributes to their overall well-being and aims to prevent further harm or injustice. Therefore, it can also be considered a form of “beneficial legislation”.
Notably, the JJSA also aligns with the concept of “social welfare legislation” because of its broader implications for promoting the well-being of juveniles and society as a whole.
As adumbrated, the JJSA marks a paradigm shift in the treatment of juvenile offenders within the criminal justice system. It modifies and amends the law relating to them by focusing on the disposal of their cases through diversion and facilitiating their rehabilitation. Recognizing their unique vulnerabilities and the necessity for support, it provides that all offences except heinous ones are to be treated as bailable. However, the practical application of section 6(3) of the JJSA has raised a critical issue. It would be absurd to say that an offence would be considered bailable when a juvenile applies for post-arrest bail and otherwise if he approaches the court for anticipatory bail. In other words, the bail process should not be contingent upon whether a juvenile is seeking post-arrest bail or anticipatory bail because it would introduce an arbitrary distinction that runs counter to the overarching objectives of the JJSA. A juvenile‟s eligibility for bail should be determined based on the nature of the offence and the specific circumstances of the case rather than the procedural mechanism through which bail is sought.
