( 2025:JHHC:37841 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 1076 of 2025 Juvenile ‘X’ through his father ...... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. Arvind Prajapati, Advocate For the State : Mr. Praful Jojo, A.P.P. ------ 05/ 17.12.2025: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. This criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 20.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Children Court, Civil Courts, Lohardaga in Cr. Appeal No. 52 of 2024 whereby the learned court has been pleased to dismiss the appeal affirming order dated 11.06.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judicial Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga in connection with Kuru P.S. Case No. 49 of 2024(S) (Misc. Cr. Application No. 912/2024) registered under sections 376DA of Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of POCSO Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Children Court, Civil Courts, Lohardaga. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was aged about 15 years at the time of alleged crime and filed the present revision application through his father. He submits that the father is ready to give undertaking that he will keep the petitioner in good behaviour and character in future and prevent him from associating with any known criminals and he will not allow the child to expose to any moral, physical, or psychological danger and in this regard he is ready to swear affidavit. He submits that there is case and counter case between the parties and petitioner is in Remand Home since 14.05.2025. He submits that the alleged occurrence is of dated 17.04.2024 however F.I.R has been lodged on 02.05.2024 and there is delay of 15 days. He next submits that nothing has come in social investigation report and medical report. He further submits that petitioner has remained in custody for one year and seven months if convicted the maximum sentence is of three years only in light of provision of J.J. Act. He submits that the petitioner may kindly be released on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer and submits that learned courts have rightly passed the impugned orders. 5. In view of above facts, it is an admitted position that the petitioner is juvenile and he is in Remand Home since 14.05.2025. There is nothing adverse in the social investigation report. The alleged occurrence is of dated 17.04.2024 however F.I.R has been lodged on 02.05.2024 and there is delay of 15 days. The petitioner is ( 2025:JHHC:37841 ) 2 being represented by his father and he is giving undertaking that he will take care of the child. 6. It appears that both the courts have been pleased to reject the bail application of the petitioner on the ground that there is chance that the petitioner will come in the contact with criminals. 7. In view of above discussions, the Court finds that the reasoning and conclusion of the learned appellate court as well as Juvenile Justice Board is not founded on reasonable grounds in the light of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protect of Children) Act, 2015. 8. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, deals with bail to juveniles. On perusal of Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015, it is crystal clear that that Section 12 of the Act overrides the bail provisions as contained in the Criminal Procedure, 1973 or any other law for time being in force. It is further crystal clear that bail to the juvenile is a rule and refusal of the same is an exception and juvenile can be denied bail only on the following three grounds (i) if there appears 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. 9. The Juvenile Justice Act is based on belief that children are the future of the society and in case they go into conflict with law under some circumstances, they should be reformed and rehabilitated and not punished. No society can afford to punish its children. Punitive approach towards children in conflict with law would be self- destructive for the society. At the same time if the peeking of the child in custody is helpful in his development and rehabilitation or protection, only then it could be said that release of the child would defeat the ends of justice. 10. In the absence of any material or evidence of reasonable grounds, it cannot be said that his release would defeat the ends of justice and have failed to give reasons on three contingencies for declining the bail to the revisionist. The findings recorded by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as appellate court are that the petitioner will come in contact with criminals. Thus, the order dated 20.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Children Court, Civil Courts, Lohardaga in Cr. Appeal No. 52 of 2024 and order dated 11.06.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judicial Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Lohardaga in connection with Kuru P.S. Case No. 49 of 2024(S) (Misc. Cr. Application No. 912/2024), are not sustainable in the eye of law and hence both the orders are set aside and the present criminal revision is allowed. 11. Let the revisionist who is in Remand Home, Lohardaga since 14.05.2025 be released on bail via assurance and surety given by his natural guardian/father, in connection with Kuru P.S. Case No. 49 of 2024(S) (Misc. Cr. Application No. 912/2024), after furnishing a personal bond on his father (Sugawan Oraon) with two sureties of his ( 2025:JHHC:37841 ) 3 relatives each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Children Court, Civil Courts, Lohardaga, subject to the following conditions: (i) Natural guardian/father 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 father will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence. (ii) Natural guardian/father 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/father will report to the Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month commencing with the first Monday of January, 2026, 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. This criminal revision petition is allowed and disposed of. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of. Dt. 17.12.2025 ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Satyarthi/-