1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 135 of 2025 …. Santosh Das aged about 14 years, son of Rajendra Das, resident of Village- Bichgadha, PO- Kiyajori, PS- Chakai ( New PS Bichkorwa), District- Jamui (Bihar) represented through his natural guardian and father of the petitioner namely Rajendra Das son of Late Bhola Das, resident of Village- Bichgadha, PO- Kiyajori, PS- Chakai ( New PS Bichkorwa), District- Jamui (Bihar) …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opp. Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the petitioner : Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, A. P. P. ….. ORAL ORDER IN COURT 06/25.03.2025 The present Criminal Revision No. 135 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the juvenile-petitioner under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 challenging the judgment dated 04.01.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Children Court, Deoghar in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 57 of 2025 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Children Court, Deoghar has dismissed the appeal and rejected the prayer for bail of the juvenile- petitioner and affirmed the order dated 03.12.2024 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate and the Members of Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P. S. Case No. 114 of 2024 corresponding to Inquiry No. 215 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 319(2)/318(4)/338/336(3)/340(2)/61 of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 66 (B)/66(C)/66(D)/84(C) of the IT Act, by which prayer for bail of the juvenile-petitioner was rejected. 2. As per the FIR, it has been alleged that four persons including the petitioner have been apprehended by the police, when 2 they were trying to commit cyber crime and one mobile phone was recovered from the petitioner. 3. Heard learned counsel for the juvenile-petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the juvenile- petitioner that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the law. It is submitted that the petitioner is juvenile and has not committed any offence. It is submitted that petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and there is nothing adverse against him in the in the Social Investigation Report and the petitioner undertakes not to commit such type of crime in future again. It is submitted that the juvenile-petitioner is in custody since 24.10.2024 and as such, he may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that there is transaction of Rs. 20,000/- from the mobile of the petitioner and the petitioner has cheated of Rs. 20,000/- from one victim Chunni Lal, who is resident of State of Rajasthan and the petitioner is involved in cyber crime and hence the prayer for bail of the juvenile- petitioner may be rejected. However, learned counsel for the State has submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. 6. Heard learned counsel for the both the sides. 7. It appears from the FIR that petitioner alongwith three other persons had been arrested and there is recovery of one mobile phone from the juvenile-petitioner. 8. It further appears that the juvenile-petitioner is in custody since 24.10.2024. 9. It appears that the father of the juvenile-petition has given Undertaking to take proper care and custody of the juvenile- 3 petitioner. 10. It appears from the Social Investigation Report of the juvenile-petitioner that due to bad company, he has started doing cyber crime. 11. However, as the father of the juvenile- petitioner has given Undertaking to take proper care and custody and considering the fact that this is first offence of the juvenile-petitioner, the juvenile petitioner, Santosh Das is directed to be released on bail in care and supervision of his Natural Guardian and Father namely Rajendra Das on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar/or his Successor Court in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P. S. Case No. 114 of 2024 corresponding to Inquiry No. 215 of 2024 subject to the condition that one the bailors must be the father of the juvenile-petitioner and one of the bailor must be having landed properties in his/her own name and subject to further condition that the juvenile petitioner will deposit the Demand Draft of Rs. 20,000/- in the name of the victim-Chunni Lal before the learned Court below, and the learned Court below through the State machinery will send the said Demand Draft to the victim namely Chunni Lal and the juvenile-petitioner as well as his father shall file an Undertaking before the learned Court below that the juvenile- petitioner will not get indulged in such type of crime in future again, otherwise prosecution will be at liberty to take steps for cancellation the bail of the juvenile-petitioner. The police shall look into the conduct of the father of the juvenile-petitioner as well for a period two years. The father of the juvenile- petitioner will submit his mobile number and self-attested copy of his Aadhar Card before the learned Court below, which he will always keep active and will not change it, during the pendency 4 of this case, without prior permission of the Court and shall produce the juvenile-petitioner as and when required. The juvenile petitioner and his father shall attend the Court in every three months till the disposal of the trial. 12. Therefore, in view of the above, the judgment dated 04.01.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Children Court, Deoghar in Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 57 of 2025 and the order dated 03.12.2024 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate and the Members of Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar (Cyber) P. S. Case No. 114 of 2024 corresponding to Inquiry No. 215 of 2024 are set aside. 13. Thus, the Criminal Revision No. 135 of 2025 is allowed and stands disposed of. 14. Let a copy of this order be sent to the office of Superintendent of Police, Deoghar as well as to the office Superintendent of Police, Jamui. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Kamlesh/