1 / 3 2025:CGHC:1843 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1280 of 2024 1 - XYZ ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate Janjgir District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, Advocate For State : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. GA (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 10/01/2025 1. This revision is against the order dated 17/09/2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.) Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa in Criminal Appeal No.98/2024, whereby the order dated 08.08.2024 rejecting the application for bail of the applicant was affirmed. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 25/07/2024 complainant Ajay Singh Rajput lodged a report at Police Station Baradwar alleging that on 24/07/2024 at about 11.00 PM a person namely Ram Singh made a call on the mobile of his nephew (Bhanja) Shivam and he said that one Ajay ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.01.22 18:13:45 +0530 2 / 3 Satnami, Sunil alias Dabala in front of TVS show-room Dhaneli, near small canal are abusing him in filthy language and are assaulting him by threatening to kill him. Thereafter, when the complainant along with the family members reached the spot then he saw that Ramsingh was lying unconscious and he sustained injuries in the back side of head, chest, shoulder and leg by the assault of some sharp edged weapon and the blood was oozing out. Thereafter, on the basis of the report the the offence was registered and the investigation started. During the investigation the petitioner was arrested and his memorandum statement was recorded whereby he accepted to have committed the said offence and on the basis of the memorandum statement seizure was made and the petitioner was produced before the JMFC on 27/07/2024 wherefrom he was sent to the Juvenile Justice Board, Korba. The petitioner filed an application under Section 12 of the J.J. Act for grant of bail before the J.J. Board, Korba and the same has been rejected and the revision against the said order has also been rejected. Hence this revision. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that during the course of seizure no any weapon has been seized from the possession of the present petitioner. He would next contend that during the course of investigation the police officers have not complied the mandatory provisions of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita. He would next contend that the petitioner has not committed any crime and he has been falsely implicated in this case, therefore, the applicant who is in captivity, may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 3 / 3 5. The appellate Court has rejected the appeal of the petitioner by holding that the J.J. Board has rejected the application for grant of bail on the ground that in case the petitioner is released on bail he will come into association of any known criminal and it will adversely affect the moral, physical & psychological attitude of the applicant. Further apart from the instant crime some other previous antecedents are to the credit of the petitioner bearing Crime No.19/2024 for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 324 and 34 of IPC and Crime No.111/24 for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 324, 34 IPC. 6. From perusal of the documents it is apparent that the petitioner has been involved in crime and in the instant case also he has tried to kill the victim. There appears to be lack of discipline and also lack of necessary protection and control of the parents. In such circumstances, the petitioner requires proper guidance and education and also the proper supervision and if he is released on bail, he will come into association of any known criminal and it will adversely affect the moral, physical & psychological attitude of the petitioner. 7. In view of the considered opinion of this Court, both the Courts below have rightly rejected the application for grant of bail of the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, the revision is dismissed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu