Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:30146 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 282 of 2025 ---------- Aman Kumar @ Aman Mahtha @ Fuchka Mahtha @ Matha, aged about 17 years, son of Late Anil Mahtha, represented through his mother and natural guardian Munniyan Devi, aged about 47 years, wife of Late Anil Mahtha, resident of House No. 86, Ward No.2, Singhwa, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar Town, District Deoghar ..… Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Respondent ---------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Appellant : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Advocate ---------- ORDER C.A.V. on 15.09.2025 Pronounced on 25.09.2025 Heard Mr. Ankit Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, learned Spl.P.P. and Mr. Lalit Yadav, learned counsel for the Informant. 2. This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant challenging the Order dated 28.01.2025, passed in M.C.A. No. 192 of 2025, by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I-cum-Children Court, Deoghar, by which prayer for bail made on behalf of the appellant, namely Aman Kumar @ Aman Mahtha @ Fuchka Mahtha @ Matha has been rejected in connection with Deoghar (Town) P.S. Case No. 124 of 2024, arising out of Children Case No 1 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 302/34 of I.P.C. Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:30146 ) 2 3. As per the F.I.R., the informant got secret information on 19.02.2024 at 12.30 a.m. about some unpleasant incident occurring in his in-laws’ house and when he arrived there then he found about hundred people surrounding the house of his in-laws and after the police reached there they opened the house and found that mother-in-law and father-in-law of the informant were lying on the ground dead with fractured skulls and gold ornaments, like Mangal Sutra, earrings of his mother-in-law were missing. On inspection of the house, the police arrested the appellant and who confessed that he had murdered the Informant’s in-laws. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the order dated 28.01.2025 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I-cum-Children Court, Deoghar is illegal and not sustainable in law. It is submitted that the appellant is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the First Information Report and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the appellant has been declared juvenile and he is in observation home since 21.02.2024. It is submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case due to some ulterior motive and in any view of the matter no case as alleged is attracted against the appellant and false implication of the appellant cannot be ruled out. It is submitted that the learned Children Court has not taken into consideration that it is settled Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:30146 ) 3 principle of law that bail to a juvenile is rule and rejection of bail of a juvenile is an exception. It is submitted that the learned Children Court while rejecting the bail of the present juvenile has failed to pass the order in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Car and Protection of Children) Act, rather heard the matter on merits like hearing of regular bail. It is submitted that the appellant has no criminal antecedent since prior to lodging of the instant case, hence, the appellant may be granted bail as he is in custody since 21.02.2024. 5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that there is direct allegation against the appellant for killing both the deceased persons. It is submitted that the appellant has also confessed his guilt in his confessional statement. It is submitted that on the disclosure of the juvenile appellant the murder weapon, i.e. the blood stained rod was recovered, which is mentioned in Para 6 of the Case Diary. It is further submitted that several witnesses, namely Suman Kumar Barnwal, Mukesh Kumar Barnwal, Santosh Kumar Barnwal, Bharat Pandit, Sandeep Sinha, Vikram Kumar, Manish Kumar, Binod Kr. Barnwal, Manoj Yadav, Rajeev Kumar, Om Prakash Singh, Anup Kr., Manoj Paswan, Jamshed Alam, whose statements have been recorded in Para 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, have supported Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:30146 ) 4 the allegation against the appellant and hence the prayer for bail made on behalf of the appellant may be rejected. 6. Perused the F.I.R., Case Diary and records of this case and considered the submission of both sides. 7. It appears from the confessional statement of the appellant recorded on 20.02.2024 in Paragraph 47 of the Case Diary, that he had admitted of assaulting both the deceased. 8. It appears that sample of blood scattered near the dead body of deceased Anuj Kumar Barnwal, the sample of blood scattered near the dead body of deceased Basmati Devi, the blood-stained iron rod of Three and half a feet lying between the dead body of the two deceased and the blood-stained T-shirt of the appellant were marked in front of the learned Court on 03.05.2024 and sent to the F.S.L. for its examination. 9. It appears that this is a case of brutal murder of elderly people. The appellant is alleged to have caused the death of both the elderly people for the reason that they sometimes had made complaints before his family members for his wrong habit of taking Khaini, Gutka and Ganja. 10. Though, allegation against the appellant is that he has allegedly killed two elderly people is very grave, but it is surprising that the dead bodies of the deceased couple were lying on the ground inside the house and gold chain and gold earring of the mother-in- law of the Informant were found missing and the appellant was also found hiding inside the house and the Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:30146 ) 5 door was closed from inside and it was opened from outside by the police and the Informant. Hence, the implication of the appellant is somewhat questionable also and his complicity can be seen during trial as to whether he has really killed the deceased couple for a trivial issue or he has been made a scapegoat for a crime committed by somebody else. 11. The F.S.L. report has to be seen during trial/enquiry later on before the learned Children Court. 12. Considering the above facts, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the Appellant at this stage and hence, prayer for bail of the appellant is rejected at this stage. 13. Thus, this Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 282 of 2025 is, hereby dismissed. 14. However, the learned Court below is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) s.m.