1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 1238 of 2023 Jitendra Oraon, aged about 16 years son of Buddhu Oraon, Resident of village- Jinda Chatti, P.O.- and P.S.-Sisai, District- Gumla, represented through his Father Buddhu Oraon, Son of Late Lutha Oraon , Resident of Village- Jinda Chatti, P.O. and P.s.- Sisai, District- Gumla …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, A.P.P. ….. Order No. 06/ Dated:28.03.2025 This Criminal Revision has been filed under section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care of Protection Act) on behalf of the petitioner by challenging the judgment dated 17.08.2023 passed by learned Special Judge ( Children Court) , Gumla in Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 2023 and Spl. POCSO Case No. 02 of 2023 by which this appeal preferred on behalf of the petitioner has been dismissed whereby affirming the order dated 06.06.2023 passed by learned Principal Magistrate , Juvenile Justice Board , Gumla in Puso P.S. Case No. 39 of 2022 dated 03.12.2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 218 of 2023 for the offence under section 376(3) of the IPC and section 4 of POCSO Act by which the bail of the petitioner has been rejected. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the prosecution case has been instituted on the basis of Written Application of Victim Girl. It has been stated by the informant that on 02.12.2022 at about 05.30 P.M she had gone to attend marriage 2 ceremony in the village, meanwhile she went to attend the call of nature near the house of one Ishwar Pal, then at that time Jitendra Oraon i.e. the Petitioner came from behind and gagged her mouth and took her towards bushes and thrashed her upon the ground and committed rape upon her. After some times one of her co-villagers came there and upon seeing him Jitendra Oraon i.e. the Petitioner fled away from there and he also threatened the Victim girl not to disclose the incident to anyone and somehow the victim girl managed to reach home. On the next morning she disclosed the incident to her parents and thereafter the case has been lodged. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Courts below are illegal and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the petitioner is juvenile and has not committed any offence. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated by the victim girl in this case. It is submitted that allegation of rape upon the Informant is totally false and concocted. It is submitted that nothing adverse is found against the juvenile petitioner in the Social Investigating Report . It is submitted that even in the report of Probation Officer , it has come that the rape has not been committed by the petitioner upon the Informant rather he had removed the clothes of the victim girl. It is submitted that no evidence of rape was found upon the victim girl in the medical report by the Doctor. It is submitted that the juvenile petitioner is in custody since 05.12.2022 and hence he may enlarged on bail. 3 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Courts are fit and proper and no interference is required. It is submitted that the direct allegation against the petitioner for committing rape upon the victim girl aged about 14 years . It is submitted that the victim girl also stated during the statement under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. that the petitioner had committed rape upon her and also supported her evidence before the learned Children Court during trial and hence the prayer for bail of the juvenile petitioner may be rejected. 6. Perused the record of this case and Lower Court Records of this case and considered the submission of both the sides. 7. It appears from the FIR that there is direct allegation against the petitioner for committing rape upon the victim girl on 02.12.2022 . 8. It appears from the report dated 21.03.2025 send by Sri Prem Shankar the learned Additional Sessions Judge -1-cum- Special Judge ( Children Court ) , Gumla that six (06) witnesses out of seven (07) have been examined so far and the next date is fixed on 24.03.2025 . 9. From perusal of the record , it appears that the victim girl has also been examined . 10. This Court refrains itself from giving any observation on merit as it may prejudice the case of the parties. However, it reveals that the victim girl has been examined as P.W. 1 and she has supported the allegation as described in the F.I.R. 4 11. Hence, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of under section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Board in favour of the petitioner at this stage. 12. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner Jitendra Oraon for bail is hereby rejected. 13. The learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months from today. 14. Under the circumstances, the judgment dated 17.08.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge ( Children Court ), Gumla in Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 2023 and the order dated 06.06.2023 passed by the learned Principle Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gumla are hereby affirmed. 15. Thus, this Criminal Revision No. 1238 of 2023 is hereby dismissed. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Bibha/