#Section 12 JJ Act

Orissa HC rules that denial of bail to a child in conflict with law under Section 12 of the JJ Act, 2015 requires specific grounds, not just the gravity of the offence. The court emphasized that detention is an exception, not the rule, and vague safety concerns are insufficient.

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that denying bail to a juvenile under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act demands more than hypothetical risks - courts must cite specific, material grounds showing real danger of reoffending or moral harm. This reinforces the statutory presumption in favor of bail for children and curbs arbitrary detention based on unsubstantiated fears.

Allahabad HC rules that bail cannot be denied to a juvenile solely based on the gravity of the offence under POCSO Act if the probation officer’s report is favorable. The court set aside the bail rejection, emphasizing that Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act requires mandatory consideration of the probation report before denying bail, reinforcing procedural safeguards for juveniles.

Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that bail must be granted to juveniles under Section 12 of JJ Act unless objective evidence shows risk of association with criminals or defeat of justice.

Chhattisgarh High Court holds that juveniles in custody over two years must be released on bail under Section 12 of JJ Act 2015, regardless of offence severity.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that bail under Section 12 of JJ Act, 2015 must be the default for juveniles unless compelling reasons exist to deny it, reinforcing child-centric jurisprudence.

Chhattisgarh High Court holds that bail under Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 is the rule, not exception. Denial requires concrete evidence of risk, not mere gravity of offence.

Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that denial of supurdgi to a juvenile must be grounded in social investigation reports, not merely the gravity of the alleged offence.