New Delhi: The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) has denied bail to two children in conflict with the law (CCLs) in connection with the Uttam Nagar Holi clash case, observing that their release could “defeat the ends of justice” and expose them to “physical and psychological danger” amid prevailing communal tension.“In such a volatile situation, the premature release of the CCLs who are named and alleged participants in the incident is likely to aggravate the prevailing situation, disturb public peace, and undermine public confidence in the justice delivery system,” the board said.The case is connected to the death of 26-year-old Tarun Butolia, who suffered fatal injuries when he was attacked on March 4, the day of Holi, in Uttam Nagar’s JJ Colony. The attack on Butolia was reportedly triggered by a dispute between two families.Opposing the plea, the investigating officer (IO) flagged “tension between two communities,” warning that the release could disturb public peace and expose the CCLs to retaliation. The prosecution further submitted that several of the accused remain absconding, recoveries are pending, and CCTV footage allegedly showed “brutal force” used by the people involved.The defence, describing the incident as a “mutual bilateral altercation between two neighbouring families,” invoked the right to life of the accused. It submitted that the granduncle of the children — one of them 14 years old — was willing to take full responsibility for their care, supervision and welfare during the proceedings.The board noted that the probation and medical reports (PMD) indicated that the children suffered from “impaired judgement, parental neglect, poor problem solving skills and poor social awareness.” It also recorded that one of the minors had stated that after getting bailed from the boys’ observation home, he is “scared of the people who are from opposite side,” indicating a fear of retaliation.The board held that the case attracted the exception of “defeating the ends of justice,” based not only on the gravity of allegations but also on the “demonstrated need for care, protection, and structured supervision of the CCLs at this stage.”While acknowledging the granduncle’s willingness, the Board found such assurances “insufficient” given the “sensitive stage” of investigation, the status of absconding accused, and pending recoveries. It further observed that release could lead to “retaliation, intimidation, or emotional harm,” particularly in light of ongoing community tension in a high-crime neighbourhood and the expressed fears of one of the minors.In the same case, a different court dismissed a separate anticipatory bail plea filed by Babu Khan, after the prosecution, led by advocate Sumit Kumar, pointed out Khan was “neither named in the FIR, nor in the subsequent complaint,” and, therefore, had no apprehension of arrest.Judge Shivali Bansal held the application wasn’t maintainable under law.
