2025:JHHC:11000 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No.55 of 2025 …. Ramu Kumar Das, aged about 16 years, son of Guhi Das, represented through his natural guardian / father Guhi Das son of Tilo Das, resident of Village Choto, P.O. Bhojpur, P.S. Devipur, District Deoghar, Jharkhand ……Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ……Opp. Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, A.P.P …… Order No.04/08.04.2025 This Criminal Revision Application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 25.11.2024 passed in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No.54 of 2024 by Sri Rajeev Ranjan, Additional Sessions Judge-I-Cum- Children Court Deoghar by which the appeal is dismissed and the prayer for bail has been rejected and thereby affirming the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar by which the petition for bail of the petitioner has been rejected in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No.106 of 2024, Enquiry No.210 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 319(2), 318 (4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66(B), 66(C), 66(D) and 84 (C) of the Informant Technology Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Court below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is 2025:JHHC:11000 2 submitted that there is recovery of one mobile phone and one SIM Card from the petitioner and other accused persons. It is submitted that there is one transaction of Rs.2,000/- from the mobile phone of the petitioner which is mentioned in Para 93 of the Case Diary. It is submitted that the father of the juvenile petitioner is giving undertaking to take proper care and supervision of the juvenile petitioner and the juvenile petitioner studies in class 9. It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 30.09.2024. and hence he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the petitioner cheated Rs.2,000/- from the victim, which is mentioned in Para 93 of the Case Diary. 5. Perused the record of this case and the case diary submitted by the learned APP. 6. It appears that that there is allegation of cheating of Rs.2,000/- from the mobile phone of the petitioner with the victim. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and the custody of the petitioner, the juvenile - petitioner namely Ramu Kumar Das is directed to be released on bail to the custody of his father, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rs.Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar or his Successor Court in Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No.106 of 2024, Enquiry No. 210 of 2024 subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be the own relative of the petitioner and guardian of the juvenile-petitioner will submit the mobile number and self- attested Aadhar Card before the learned Court below, which he will always keep active and will not change it, and the juvenile- petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the learned Court 2025:JHHC:11000 3 below, during the pendency of this case, without prior permission of the Court and shall produce the juvenile-petitioner as and when required and the petitioner shall give undertaking that he will not indulge in such activity in future again, failing which the prosecution will be at liberty to take for cancellation of bail in accordance with law. The father of the juvenile petitioner will deposit Rs.2,000/- in the name of the victim namely Sunil Kumar Gurjar, S/O Hiralal Gurjar, Add-Vill-Devsar, Singrauli, Madhya Pradesh 486881 before the learned Court below which shall be disbursed to the victim namely Sunil Kumar Gurjar, Add-Vill- Devsar, Singrauli, Madhya Pradesh 486881 on proper identification by filing such an application through his counsel. 8. Accordingly, the judgment dated 25.11.2024 passed in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No.54 of 2024 by Sri Rajeev Ranjan, Addl. Sessions Judge-I-Cum-Children Court Deoghar and the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P.S. Case No.106 of 2024, Enquiry No. 210 of 2024 are set aside. 9. This Criminal Revision Application No.55 of 2025 is allowed. 10. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Court below. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Nishant/-