[2025:RJ-JP:49845] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 2266/2025 Juvenile Conflict With Law “S” Son Of Shri Nasir, Aged About 16 Years, Resident Of Village Bhilmala, Police Station Deeg, District Deeg (Rajasthan) (Presently Confined In Observation Home At Bharatpur, Rajasthan) Through Natural Guardian Brother Inus Son Of Shri Nasir. ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ankit Khandelwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devi Singh, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR Order 08/12/2025 1. Instant revision petition is preferred on behalf of CCL in a matter arising out of FIR No.316/2025 registered at P.S. Deeg, District Deeg wherein bail application under Section 12 of JJ Act was dismissed by Principal Magistrate, JJB, Deeg District Deeg on 01.11.2025 and subsequent appeal No.174/2025 was dismissed on 07.11.2025 by learned District and Sessions Judge, Deeg (Raj.) Ex-officio Judge, Commission for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005, Deeg. 2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner along with six other individuals have been implicated for [2025:RJ-JP:49845] (2 of 3) [CRLR-2266/2025] committing the cyber crime. It is submitted that co-accused Wasim Akram, Arbaz, Jakar, Saheed, Mohammad Akram @ Vikram, and Aamir have already been enlarged on bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court on 03.12.2025. Petitioner is behind the bars since 24.10.2025. Therefore, on the ground of the parity, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail application. 5. Section 12 of the JJ Act mandates that the bail is the rule and refusal is exception unless one or more of the following statutory exceptions are satisfied:- (i) Possibility of association with known criminals, (ii) exposure to moral, physical or physiological danger, (iii) likelihood of defeating the ends of justice, 6. In the instant case, there is no substantive material on record to indicate that the release of the juvenile petitioner would bring him into association with known criminals or his release would expose him to any moral, physical or physiological threat and defeat the ends of justice. Therefore, in view of the above, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 01.11.2025 and 07.11.2025 passed by both the Courts below are quashed and set aside. It is ordered that if guardian of CCL (juvenile) “S” submits an undertaking in form of supurdginama (personal bond) of ₹50,000/- with two sureties of ₹25,000/- each with condition that he will produce petitioner (CCL) in the said inquiry before concerned Principle Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board or any other court (if matter is transferred/assigned) on each fixed date of hearing and in case the CCL is released on bail [2025:RJ-JP:49845] (3 of 3) [CRLR-2266/2025] and custody is given to him, he will not create any situation which will bring the delinquent CCL into association with any known or unknown criminal or expose him to moral, physical and psychological danger or any situation and also the delinquent CCL may not repeat the offence of any nature and he will work for improvement of the delinquent CCL. Further, following conditions are also imposed- (i) On monthly basis, guardian will ensure that petitioner-CCL be taken to psychological assistance available in the district; if same is not available in the district then on quarterly basis at the place where same is available (ii) Petitioner-CCL will not influence any of the evidence. 7. Misc. application, if any, stands disposed of. (PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J Arun/25