The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to a 17-year-old accused in connection with a 2025 grenade attack on a police post in Haryana’s Kaithal district. The court ruled that lower judicial bodies cannot deny bail to a minor based on factors like social media addiction or peer influence.
Justices Vinod S Bhardwaj and Sukhvinder Kaur overturned previous decisions by the Juvenile Justice Board and the Kaithal Children’s Court. The division bench determined that the reasons given by the lower courts to withhold bail did not meet the statutory criteria outlined in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which mandates that a child in conflict with the law should ordinarily be released.
In its July 6 order, the high court emphasized that the petitioner had no prior criminal record and had already spent one year, two months, and 12 days in custody.
Lower Court Decisions Overturned
The minor’s bail plea was previously rejected by the juvenile board and subsequently by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children Court in Kaithal. The lower courts had argued that because the petitioner’s father was deceased and the boy was highly active on social media, keeping him in custody was necessary for his own benefit. They asserted that a lack of parental supervision combined with social media exposure would likely lead the youth into further illegal activities.
However, the high court rejected this reasoning, stating that the death of one parent does not automatically justify the assumption that a minor is entirely devoid of parental control or supervision. The bench also pointed out that the state had failed to clarify whether any other elder family members were available to supervise the petitioner.
Background of the Grenade Attack
The case originates from an incident on April 6, 2025, when an explosion occurred at approximately 5:20 AM behind a building located within the boundary wall of a police post in Kaithal. An inquiry later confirmed that the incident was a targeted grenade attack on the deployed police personnel.
Following the blast, a social media post reportedly claiming to be from the Babbar Khalsa terrorist organization took responsibility for the attack. The petitioner, who was then a 17-year-and-10-month-old ITI student, was arrested on April 18, 2025, following the investigation.
Defense Arguments and Social Report
During the high court proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel, Vivek Sharma, argued that excessive mobile phone usage, internet addiction, or peer group influence are not sufficient grounds to establish a link between the minor and the Khalistan Zindabad Force or any other unlawful activities.
Sharma also pointed out that the official social investigation report did not indicate that releasing the minor would expose him to any physical, psychological, or moral danger, or that his release would defeat the ends of justice.
The high court agreed with these arguments, noting that the social investigation report only documented the boy’s internet habits and peer susceptibility, which do not constitute statutory grounds to deny bail. Deputy Advocate General Chhavi Sharma represented the state and opposed the bail application.
