[2025:JHHC:25915] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 658 of 2025 1.Juvenile X-1, aged about 17 years son of Jogendra Oraon represented through his legal natural guardian i.e Father namely Jogendar Oraon aged about 48 years Son of Ladu Oraon. 2. Juvenile X-2 aged about 17 years Son of Bhaula Singh represented through his guardian i.e Grandfather namely Uday Singh aged about 68 years S/o Late Ram Sharan Singh. Both R/o Village Korambe Gora Toli, P.O and P.S.-Senha, District- Lohardaga (Jharkhand). ..... … Petitioners Versus State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Suraj Kishore Prasad, Advocate. For the State : Mr. P.D. Agarwal, A.P.P. ------ 04/ 27.08.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. 2. This revision petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 22.04.2025, passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga, in Misc. Criminal Application No. 449 of 2025, in connection with Senha P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 331(4), 305, 317(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, whereby the prayer for bail of the petitioners has been rejected and further prayer is made for setting aside the judgment dated 16.06.2025, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court), Lohardaga, whereby the order of the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga has been confirmed by the learned appellate court. [2025:JHHC:25915] -2- 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner No. 1 is being represented by his father and petitioner No. 2 is being represented by his grandfather. He submits that the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 both are aged about 17 years and odd. He submits that the petitioners are in observation home since 18.03.2025 and the father and grandfather of these petitioners are ready to give any undertaking and they will take care of their child and they will not allow them to accompany any known criminal and they will not allow them to expose them to moral, physical or psychological danger and they are also ready to swear an affidavit in this regard. He further submits that from whom, the articles has been recovered has already been provided the privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 3136 of 2025. He also submits that the petitioners are having no criminal antecedent. He further submits that both the learned courts have rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioners on the ground that there is likelihood that the petitioners will be exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State submits that the learned courts have rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioners stating therein that if the petitioners will be released, they will be exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger, however, he submits that the petitioners are the juveniles. 5. In view of the above, it transpires that the petitioners are juvenile and their father and grandfather respectively are representing these petitioners and both of them are ready to take care of the petitioners. 6. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, deals with bail to juveniles. On perusal of Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015, it is crystal clear that the juvenile can be denied bail only on the following three grounds (i) if there appears reasonable [2025:JHHC:25915] -3- grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal, or (ii) expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger, or, (iii) the person’s release would defeat the ends of justice. 7. From Section 12 of the said Act, it also transpires that seriousness of the alleged offence or the age of the juvenile are also no relevant consideration for denial of bail above 16 years of age. Section 12 of the Act is applicable to all juveniles in conflict with law without any discrimination of any nature. 8. The learned trial court and the learned appellate court both have rejected the prayer for bail stating therein that if the petitioners will be released, they will be exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger. The court finds that the said reasoning does not sound good. 9. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 22.04.2025, passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga, in connection with Misc. Criminal Application No. 449 of 2025, in connection with Senha P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025, and the judgment dated 16.06.2025, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court), Lohardaga, are hereby, set aside. 10. Let the revisionists, who are in observation home since 18.03.2025, be released on bail via assurance and surety given by their natural guardians i.e. father and grandfather respectively, in connection with Senha P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025 after furnishing personal bond of their father and grandfather respectively with two sureties of his relatives each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga, subject to the following conditions: (i) Natural guardian/father/grandfather will furnish an [2025:JHHC:25915] -4- undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionist will not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical, or psychological danger and further that the father will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence. (ii) Natural guardian/father/grandfather will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level which he would be encouraged to do besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits. (iii) Juvenile and natural guardian/father/grandfather will report to the Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month commencing with the first Monday of September, 2025, and if during any calendar month the first Monday falls on a holiday, then on the following working day. (iv) The Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga, on such a periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine. 11. With the above observation, this criminal revision is allowed and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Amitesh/-