CRLREV No.626 of 2025 p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV No.626 of 2025 (An application Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015). Chandan Barada … Petitioner -versus- State of Odisha & Another … Opposite Parties For Petitioner : Mr. R. Singh, Advocate For Opposite Parties : Mr. C. Mohanty, Addl. PP CORAM: JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY F DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT:05.02.2026(ORAL) G. Satapathy, J. 1. This criminal revision U/S.102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short, “the Act”) is directed against the impugned order dated 05.08.2025 passed by the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Children’s Court, Berhampur in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2025 confirming the order dated 07.07.2025 passed by the learned JJB, Ganjam, Berhampur in JR No. 55 of 2025 in refusing to grant bail to the revision-petitioner in connection with Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 186 of 2025 for commission of offences punishable U/Ss. CRLREV No.626 of 2025 p. 2 61/64(1)/70(1)/74/79/87/296/351(3)/310(2) of BNS, on the main allegation of committing Gang Rape upon the victim by taking away her mobile phone and Rs.1,000/- through PhonePe forcibly. 2. Heard, Mr. Raghunath Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner-Child in Conflict with Law (CICL) and Mr. C. Mohanty, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record. 3. No doubt, bail is the rule to the CICL, but detention is an exception, however, in this case, the allegation depicts that around 7 to 8 boys had taken the victim to a secluded place by separating from her boyfriend and committed Gang Rape upon her. It is of course true that unless there appears reasonable grounds for believing that release of the CICL would likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to any moral, physical or psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice, the CICL should be admitted to bail. Further, the Social Investigation Report (SIR) as produced in this case reveals that the petitioner-CICL CRLREV No.626 of 2025 Page 3 of 3 has allegedly committed the offence due to peer group influence. The allegation leveled against the petitioner- CICL itself demonstrates that he is allegedly in association with bad company, which is one of the restriction imposed in proviso appended to Sec.12 of the Act to refuse bail to the CICL. 4. In this situation and after having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offences as alleged against the petitioner vis-à-vis the accusations sought to be brought against him and taking into account the recommendation of the Probation Officer in the SIR and keeping in view the allegation itself demonstrating the bad company of the petitioner- CICL, this Court does not consider it proper to admit the petitioner-CICL to bail. 5. Hence, the prayer for bail to the petitioner-CICL stands rejected. (G. Satapathy) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 5th day of February, 2026/S.Sasmal Designation: Jr. Stenographer