2025:JHHC:29734 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.897 of 2025 Juvenile ‘X’ through his mother …. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opp. Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Arpit Kumar, Advocate. For the Opp. Party : Ms. Sushma Aind, APP ------ 3/24.09.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State. 2. This Criminal Revision has been preferred against the order dated 09.07.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- Cum- Spl. Judge (Children's Court), Lohardaga in Cr. Appeal No. 48/2025 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed and the prayer for bail of the Juvenile was rejected, which was filed against the order dated 11.06.2025 passed learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga, in connection with Senha P.S. Case No.33 of 2025 registered for the offences under sections 331(4), 305, 317(2), 3(5) of B.N.S and now the case is pending before the Court of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a juvenile and he was aged about 13 years at the time of alleged occurrence. He further submits that he is in remand home since 18.03.2025. He then submits that the petitioner is being represented by his mother and the mother is ready to give any 2025:JHHC:29734 2 undertaking that she will take care of the child and she will not allow him to expose to any moral, physical and physiological danger. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the learned Courts have rejected the prayer of the petitioner on the ground of nature of allegation. 5. It is admitted position that the petitioner is a juvenile. Petitioner is in remand home since 18.03.2025 and the mother is ready to give any undertaking that she will take care of the child and she will not allow him to expose to any moral, physical and physiological danger. It has been pointed out that one co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court in Criminal Revision No.658 of 2025. 6. Learned Courts have rejected the bail of the petitioner which does not sound good as per Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which deals with bail to juveniles. Juvenile can be denied bail only on the following three grounds as per the said Act, which are (i) if there appear reasonable 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 is also no relevant consideration for denial of bail above 16 years of age and is alleged to have committed a heinous offence is also entitled to get bail under section 12 of the Act, 2015. There is no classification, 2025:JHHC:29734 3 whatsoever, provided in Section 12 of the Act, 2015 with regard to grant of bail. Section 12 of the Act is applicable to all juveniles in conflict with law without any discrimination of any nature. 8. In view of the above, it transpires that the gravity of the allegation is not the ground to reject the bail of a Juvenile in the light of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and the learned Courts have been pleased to reject the bail of the petitioner only on the ground of nature of allegation. 9. It appears that the ground of rejection is not considered as per Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 in right perspective by the learned Courts and in view of that the order dated 09.07.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-Cum- Spl. Judge (Children's Court), Lohardaga in Cr. Appeal No. 48/2025 and the order dated 11.06.2025 passed learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga, in connection with Senha P.S. Case No.33 of 2025 are hereby set-aside. 10. In view of that, this Criminal Revision Petition is allowed. 11. Since the revisionist is in observation home since 18.03.2025, he is directed to be released on bail via assurance and surety given by his natural guardian/mother in connection with Senha P.S. Case No.33 of 2025, after furnishing a personal bond of his mother with two sureties of his relative each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga, subject to the following conditions: - 2025:JHHC:29734 4 (i) Natural guardian/mother will furnish an 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 mother will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence. (ii) Natural guardian/mother 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/mother will report to the Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month commencing with the first Monday of October, 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. 12. As such, this Criminal Revision is disposed of. Pending I.A. if any stands disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 24.08.2025 R.Kumar