1 2025:CGHC:6419 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1352 of 2024 1 - Abc Nil. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Khamtarai, Distt. Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Pranjal Shukla, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 04/02/2025 This Criminal Revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children), Act 2015 (for Short " Act of 2015") has been filed challenging the legality, judicial propriety and correctness of order dated 21.11.2024 passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Raipur, District Raipur (CG), in Criminal Appeal No.400/2024 whereby the Ld. Court dismissed the criminal appeal preferred by the applicant against the order dated 5.11.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, Mana Camp, Raipur, District 2 Raipur (CG) dismissing the application for grant of bail by the applicant under Section 12 of Act of 2015. 2. The case of prosecution in brief, is that information was received by the informant to the concerned police station that on the date of incident, some dispute took place between the accused persons and the injured and there was maarpeeth between them. On the basis of the said information the police registered offence under Sections 296,351(2), 115 (2), 331(6), 3(5), 109, 191(2),191(3) of the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act against the accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant/juvenile-conflict-with-law argued that the provisions of Section 12 of Act of 2015 mandates that " the juvenile shall be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of the probation officer or under the care of any fit person. Provided that such person shall not be released on bail if there appears reasonable ground for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger, or the person's release would defeat the ends of justice". In the case, in hand, learned Court below has given a finding that looking to the seriousness of the offence, appeal is dismissed and the Court below has not considered the provision of Section 12 of Act of 2015 in its proper perspective and thereby committed irregularity while rejecting the appeal. He further submits that in order to find out the physical and mental status of juvenile in conflict with law there is a provision under Section 14 and 15 of Act of 2015. He submits that the provision of Section 15 was considered and the finding under Section 15 of the Act of 2015 has 3 already been given by Juvenile Justice Board to try the offence before the Juvenile Justice Board and not before the Children Court, therefore, the revision should be allowed and the applicant should be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is a categorical finding recorded by learned Court below with regard to the seriousness of the offence and also given a finding that in the interest of justice, the applicant juvenile- conflict-with-law shall not be released on bail. It is further submitted that these findings are based on proper assessment of the material placed before it and therefore the finding recorded does not suffer from any patent illegality or material irregularity warranting interference by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and considered their rival submissions. 6. Taking into consideration the fact that on the date of incident, there was some hot talk between the accused and the injured persons and there was maar peeth however, there was no specific allegation against the applicants of committing the alleged offence/crime, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 7. From the perusal of the record, I do not find any reasonable ground having been brought before the Juvenile Justice Board or the Police Authorities in respect of the so called threat of the juvenile getting exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger or come in the company of known criminal. 4 8. In view of above consideration, the impugned order dated 12.10.2022 could not be sustained and is therefore, set aside. The application under Section 12 of the Act of 2015 is allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail forthwith on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/-, by the parents or guardians of the applicant, as the case may be, to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board for his appearance before the Board, as and when directed. 9. Revision is accordingly allowed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.02.10 14:14:19 +0530