Juvenile Justice Act | Heinousness of Offence No Bar to Bail if Adult Co-Accused Released: Punjab & Haryana High Court In RPG Attack Case

“Long detention of the juveniles in the observation Home will adversely affect their academics... There is nothing on record that if released, there is likelihood of their being used by anti-social elements”— In a seminal ruling High Court of Punjab & Haryana, comprising Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill and Justice Ramesh Kumari, allowed criminal appeals filed by two juveniles accused in the sensational RPG attack on Police Station Sarhali, granting them regular bail despite charges under UAPA and the Explosive Substances Act.

“RPG Attack on Police Station”: The Prosecution Case

The controversy stems from FIR No. 187 dated December 10, 2022, registered at Police Station Sarhali, District Tarn Taran. The prosecution alleged a terror attack involving a Rocket Propelled Grenade (RPG) fired at the Sanjh Kendra of the Police Station. The investigation, led by DSP Satnam Singh, resulted in the recovery of a rocket launcher and an RPG-26 shell. The State invoked stringent provisions under Sections 307, 120-B IPC, Section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and Section 16 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The appellants, identified as P.S. @ R and D.S., were apprehended as juveniles (Children in Conflict with Law). The allegations against them included the recovery of a .32 bore pistol and live cartridges, alongside a disclosure statement by a co-accused, Ajmer Singh, implicating them in executing the attack.

“Wrath of the Community”: Why Bail Was Denied Below

The Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran, had previously declined bail via orders dated August 8, 2023, and September 1, 2023. The lower court reasoned that the use of a "deadly weapon" like a Rocket Launcher "shocks the conscience of the society." The trial court expressed apprehension that releasing the juveniles would expose them to the "wrath of the community" due to retribution and that they might reconnect with anti-social elements, thereby endangering their moral and psychological well-being.

“Adult Co-Accused on Bail”: The Parity Argument

In overturning the lower court's decision, the High Court placed significant weight on the principle of parity. The Division Bench observed that several adult co-accused—including Jobanpreet Singh, Gurpreet Singh, and Gurlal Singh—had already been granted regular bail by the trial court. The Court noted a stark disparity: while adult accused found in possession of grenades and multiple firearms were released, the juveniles remained incarcerated. Specifically, the Court highlighted that the recovery from the adult accused included a P-86 Grenade and various pistols, whereas the recovery from the juveniles was limited to a pistol and cartridges. Furthermore, the Court observed that the evidentiary value of the co-accused's disclosure statement, which linked the juveniles to the RPG attack, is a matter to be determined during the trial.

“Education Over Incarceration”: Securing the Future

The Bench firmly rejected the State's apprehension that the juveniles would revert to crime. The Court held that there was no record to substantiate the claim that the appellants would come into contact with known criminals if released. Prioritizing the welfare and rehabilitation of the minors, the Court noted that one of the appellants is a Bachelor of Arts (Semester-1) student scheduled to appear for exams in December 2025. The Judges reasoned that continued detention would serve no purpose and would irreparably harm their academic prospects. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders set aside, directing the release of the juveniles subject to furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of the Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board.

Date of Decision: 27.11.2025