1 2025:CGHC:59655 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1491 of 2025 Abc Nil ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Mulmula, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Paras Mani Shriwas, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, Panel lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 09/12/2025 1. This revision is against the judgment dated 19.11.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) (POCSO) Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No. 167/2025 arising out of order dated 30.10.2025 passed in Criminal Case No. 334/2025 by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Janjgir, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 2. As per the case of the prosecution story, on 26.08.2025, complainant namely Chandrashekhar Tandan has lodged report 2 against an unknown at Police Station-Mulmula and stating that on dated 25.07.2024 at about 5.00 P.M. his minor Son namely Samrat Tandan was playing near his house, who gone to anywhere, they trying to search him here and there but he did not tracing out, he doubt his minor son is kidnapped by any person. On the basis of said complaint F.I.R. has been registered against the unknown persons under section 137 (2), 61, 140, 142 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanita 2023 and under section 25, 27 of Arms Act. 3. That, thereafter police officers of the police station Mulmula, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) have started to investigate the matter and during the course of investigation Minor Samrat Tandan has been recovered from possession of the accused persons, meanwhile recorded their memorandum statement, whereas they admitted about the abduction of minor Samrat Tandan for the purpose of ransom (Firauti) and thereafter petitioner as well as other co-accused persons have arrested by concern prosecution authorities on dated 28.08.2025 thereafter petitioner sent to the juvenile home. That, thereafter petitioner has filed an application under section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act before the Juvenile Board for grant of bail which has been rejected on dated 30.10.2025 and thereafter he filed Criminal Appeal No. 167/2025 before the Additional Session Judge, F.T.S.C. (Pocso) Janjgir, District-Janjgir- Champa (C.G.), which has also been rejected on dated 19.11.2025 and affirmed the order of the Juvenile Board. 3 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has not been involving in the alleged offence. The impugned judgment of the courts below are contrary to law. He prays that the applicant is in captivity since 20.08.2025 therefore, he may be released on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 6. Heard learned counsels for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 7. Considering the nature and gravity of the alleged offence, the age and vulnerability of the child, the surrounding circumstances, and the likelihood of the child coming into contact with known criminals or falling into moral, physical, or psychological danger if released on bail. The findings recorded indicate that the child presently requires proper supervision, guidance, and protective care, and that release on bail at this stage may defeat the ends of justice and the object of juvenile protection. 8. The impugned order reflects due application of mind and is based on relevant considerations. This Court finds no perversity, illegality, or material irregularity warranting interference in appellate jurisdiction. 9. Consequently, the present Criminal Revision is rejected. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima