1 2025:CGHC:61865 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1495 of 2025 ABC ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station- Sanawal, Distt. - Balrampur-Ramanujganj, (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Dashrath Kushwaha, Advocate For State-Respondent : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, PL Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 19/12/2025 1. This criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 being aggrieved by the order dated 12.11.2025 (Annexure A- 1) passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act), Ramanujganuj, District Balrampur – Ramanujganj (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No.53/2025, arising out of order dated 31.10.2025 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Balrampur, VASANT KUMAR Digitally signed by VASANT KUMAR Date: 2025.12.20 16:45:25 +0530 2 District Balrampur – Ramanujganj (C.G.) in Criminal Case No.80/2025, whereby the learned appellate Court has dismissed the appeal of the applicant and confirmed the order of the learned trial Court. 2. Brief facts of this case are that the complainant has lodged report to the concerned police station alleging that on the date of incident, i.e., 15.08.2025 about 04 PM when victim was gone to field and at that time accused Priyans Bhuiya came there about her and he has committed sexual intercourse with the victim with the help of the juvenile applicant. Based upon the such complaint made by the complainant, police has registered against the accused person for the offence punishable under section 65(1), 70 of B.N.S. and section 04 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and only on the basis of juvenile applicant has falsely been implicated in connection of this crime. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that both the courts below have erred in law in rejecting the bail application as also appeal filed by the applicant. He further contended that the juvenile applicant has neither assaulted upon the injured person nor committed any aforesaid offences as alleged by the prosecution against him. The prosecution has not made allegation against the applicant directly because no name of the juvenile applicant has mentioned in lodging FIR and only on the basis of merely suspicious, the juvenile applicant has falsely been implicated in this crime without any sufficient material available on record. He further contended that the injured person was received 3 injuries which is committed by the other accused persons not by the present applicant and the prosecution has not seized any article from the possession of the juvenile applicant with regard to incident took place. The injured person was found injuries in simple nature not in a grievous nature. There is no ingredient of offence punishable under section under section 65(1), 70 of B.N.S. and section 04 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 of the prosecution story against the present applicant. It is therefore, that this Court may be pleased to allow this criminal revision and set-aside the impugned Judgment dated 12.11.2025 (Annexure A-1) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act) Ramanujganj District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) and applicant may kindly be granted bail. 4. Learned counsel for the State-Respondent opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the order passed by the trial Court/Juvenile Court is just and proper needs no interference. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and other material available on record with utmost circumspection. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and from perusal of the record, I have found that the present juvenile - applicant is not the main accused in the crime in question and the 4 name of the applicant is also not mentioned in the FIR. The other co- accused person committed rape upon the victim. Even though the statement made by the victim under Section 183 of the BNSS not mentioned that the present applicant has committed rape with her. However, in the supplementary statement, the victim's mother and sister have named the applicant. Further considering the fact that the social status report is in favour of the juvenile- applicant. The applicant is in custody since 29.08.2025. 7. Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 provides as under : “12. Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non- bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety [or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person] but he shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose 5 him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice.” 8. In view of the above, the present criminal revision is allowed and the order dated 12.11.2025 (Annexure A-1) is hereby set aside and it is directed that the Juvenile-applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond by his natural guardian, in the sum of Rs.10,000/-, with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice Board/Court, with an undertaking of his parents that he will take care of the applicant. The applicant shall appear before the concerned Board as and when directed. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant