2025:JHHC:16175 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No.466 of 2025 …. Shyam Kishore Rana, Aged about 27 years, Son of Baleshwar Rana R/o Village-Jilanga, P.O & P.S. Balumath, District-Latehar ……Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ……Opp. Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner :Mr. Anup Kumar, Advocate Mr. Vishnu Prabhakhar Pathak, Advocate For the State :Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P …… Order No.03/18.06.2025 This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 09.04.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.20 of 2025 by Sri Dinesh Kumar Mishra, learned Sessions Judge-I-cum-Children Court, Latehar by which the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed thereby, affirming the order dated 05.03.2025 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Latehar in connection with Balumath P.S. Case No.45/2009, corresponding to G.R. Case No.179/2009(S), S.T. Case No.15/2014 corresponding to Juvenile Case No.01/2025 by which the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected. 2. As per the F.I.R, it is alleged by the Informant namely Nanhak Rama that his daughter Prabha Devi was married with Arjun Rana around two years ago. However, after marriage, her in-laws were demanded Rs.50,000/- in cash and later on 01.04.2009 her mother in-law Sharda Devi informed the father of the deceased that his daughter is traceless. Thereafter, he arrived at her matrimonial house and then he was informed by the mother-in- 2025:JHHC:16175 2 law that the body of deceased daughter Prabha Devi was found in the well. It is alleged by the Informant that her father in law i.e. Baleshwar Rana, Mother-in-law i.e. Sharda Devi, husband Arjun Rana and Devar i.e. Shyam Kishore Rana (i.e. the juvenile petitioner) and Mosera brother of the petitioner were quarreling with the deceased and they have killed his daughter and her dead body was found in the well. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the juvenile petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. It is submitted that the petitioner was minor at the time of occurrence and aged around 11 years. It is submitted that there is no specific overt-act against the juvenile petitioner rather general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against all the persons including the juvenile petitioner. It is submitted that the trial of the petitioner was separated and the trial of the main accused i.e. the father in law and mother-in-law have disposed of by the learned Trial Court after convicting them. It is submitted that the juvenile petitioner is in custody since 19.01.2025 and in view of the beneficial provision of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act and also in the light of the judgment rendered in Juvenile in Conflict with law Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr. reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 5297 and hence the juvenile may be released on bail. 5. Learned APP has opposed the prayer of bail. It is submitted that the juvenile petitioner was also involved in committing the dowry death of the deceased Prabha Devi. It is submitted that there is allegation against all the family members including the juvenile petitioner for demanding dowry and assaulting the deceased and due to which the deceased Prabha Devi 2025:JHHC:16175 3 had died. It is submitted that the juvenile petitioner remained absconded for a very long period and arrested for the first time in 2025 on the basis of permanent warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner in the year 2016. It is submitted that all the witnesses have supported the allegation levelled against the family members including the juvenile petitioner for committing of dowry death and hence the prayer for bail of the juvenile petitioner may be rejected. 6. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the records of this case. 7. It appears from the FIR that five (05) persons including the Juvenile petitioner is alleged to have involved in the dowry death of the deceased Prabha Devi i.e. daughter of the informant. 8. It also appears that the Informant himself stated in the FIR that the Devar Shyam Kishore Rana (i.e. the juvenile petitioner) was aged around 14 years on the date of occurrence. 9. It appears from the FIR that there is no specific allegation against the juvenile petitioner for demanding dowry from the daughter of the informant rather he was a minor boy aged around 14 years and the juvenile petitioner is the devar of the deceased and father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased lady have already been convicted. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and the facts that the juvenile petitioner is in custody since 19.01.2025, the juvenile petitioner namely Shyam Kishore Rana is directed to be released on bail in care and supervision of brother of the Juvenile petitioner on furnishing of bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rs.Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice 2025:JHHC:16175 4 Board, Jamshedpur in connection with Balumath P.S. Case No.45/2009, G.R. Case No.179/2009(S), S.T. Case No.15/2014 corresponding to Juvenile Case No.01/2025 with the condition that he will co-operate with the Trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Addhar Card in the Court below with an Undertaking that he will not change his mobile number and will not temper the witnesses of the case. The custody of the juvenile be handed over to the brother of the Juvenile petitioner. 11. Accordingly, judgment dated 09.04.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 2025 by Dinesh Kumar Mishra, learned Sessions Judge-I-cum-Children Court, Latehar and order dated 05.03.2025 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Latehar are set aside. 12. Thus, this Criminal Revision Application No.466 of 2025 is allowed. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Nishant/-