1 2025:CGHC:61826 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1526 of 2025 Def Nill ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Takhatpur, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Badruddin Khan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 19/12/2025 1. This revision is against the judgment dated 14.11.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) and Children Court Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 284/2025 under Section 101 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. 2 2. As per the case of the prosecution, a complaint was lodged by the complainant/victim on 24.10.2025 before the Takhatpur police Station alleging that on 12.07.2025 one of the co-accused/child had lured the complainant to his house and had sexually assaulted her, thereafter subsequently, after few days applicant along with other co-accused children started blackmailing the complainant/victim stating that her obscene video has been made by them and they will viral the video if she doesn’t come to meet them. Subsequently, on 23.10.2025 the video was shared on social platforms. On the basis of the complaint, Crime No. 623/2025 for offences under Sections 64, 3(5) of BNS, Sections 4 and 15 of the POCSO Act and Section 67-B of the IT Act was registered against the accused children and the accused children were arrested on 25.10.2025 and notice of the Hon’ble Court that there are 4 accused persons in the instant crime number. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the the courts below have failed to analyze the evidence produced by the prosecution in this case. The video has not been circulated by the applicant and as such he is not the main accused in the instant matter. The applicant is the student of Class XII and have no criminal antecedents. He would next contend that the J.J. Board has failed to consider the mandate of Section 12 of the J.J. Act and the social investigation report is also in favour of the applicant, therefore, the applicant who is in captivity since 25.10.2025, may be released on bail. 3 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 5. Perused the Social Investigation Report which is in favour of the applicant. Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015 which provides for bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law. 6. Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015 is reproduced hereinbelow:- “12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law. (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a a bailable or non- bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or 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 person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds 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 persons release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer 4 shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home1[or a place of safety, as the case may be] in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub- section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order. (4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfill the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail.” 7. The victim along with her mother appeared in person before this Court and submitted that she has no objection if bail is granted to the applicant. 8. Considering the social investigation report which shows that the applicant is aged about 17 years and it is his first offence and his behaviour with the neighbours are good and also considering the provisions of Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015 and the no objection of the mother of the prosecutrix, I am inclined to allow this revision and release the applicant on bail. 9. Consequently, the revision is allowed and the judgment dated 14.11.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) and Children Court Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 284/2025 are set aside. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a surety of Rs.10,000/- which is to be of his guardian 5 to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice Board, for his appearance as and when directed. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima