2025:CGHC:15822 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 154 of 2025 Juvenile In Conflict With Law (Juvenile In Observation Home) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) … Respondent (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Applicant : Shri Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms Vaishali Mahilong, PL For victim/objector : Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 03.04.2025 1. Present Criminal Revision filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short, ‘Act 2015’) against the Judgment dated 16.01.2025 (Annexure A1), passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, Raipur, District-Raipur, CG, in Criminal Appeal- 25 of 2025, whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant under Section 101 of the Act 2015 was rejected, and the order of rejection of bail by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Raipur dated 07.01.2025 in Crime No.474 of 2024 registered at Police Station- Rajendra Nagar, Raipur is affirmed. Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.04.23 10:43:34 +0530 Crr 154 of 2025 2 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant, admittedly, is a juvenile, and he is in Observation Home since 21.12.2024. It is further submitted that as per Section 12 of the Act 2015, for the purpose of releasing a juvenile on bail, the gravity of the offence is not to be seen. It is also submitted that the learned Juvenile Justice Board, as well as the learned Appellate Court have not discussed anything, so far as the merits of the case, and the merits of the case would be of no relevance while considering the bail application of the juvenile. He would also submit that the applicant is suffering from various ailments, including psychiatric disorder during his stay at observation home, and his health condition is deteriorating. There is no possibility that after releasing him on bail, he will again come in association of criminal persons, or there is no reason to believe that release of the applicant is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal, or expose him to moral, physical, or psychological danger, or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. Therefore, the juvenile applicant may be released on bail. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant on the ground that taking into consideration the nature of offence committed by the applicant, it is not a fit case, where the applicant be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel also referred to the report of the Probationary Officer of the concerned Juvenile Jail. Crr 154 of 2025 3 4. Learned counsel for the victim/objector vehemently oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, and would submit that in the present case, the allegation of rape upon the minor victim, aged about 14 years, is alleged on the juvenile applicant, aged about 15 years 11 months, who is also a student of the same school, where the victim is studying. The manner in which the victim was subjected to rape by the applicant that he took her on the pretext that other teacher of the school are calling her, and took her to a lonely place in the school, where there is no CC TV coverage, so that he could escape from the offence. Thereafter, even he committed rape upon her in her house itself, after giving threatening to her. By the act of the applicant, the victim went in depression, and avoiding going to school, and tuition. Father of the applicant is in Police service, and he threatened the victim that no one will take action against the applicant, as he is the son of a Police Officer. He would further submit that whenever she disclosed the incident to her teacher, they did not take care about her complaint. When the victim was being taken to the Psychiatrist for counseling, she disclosed the entire incident to her, and then, the report has been lodged. Although the merits of the case and gravity of the offence would not be relevant for consideration of bail application of a juvenile, but in the facts and circumstances of the present case, releasing the applicant on bail would defeat the ends of justice, as the victim is apprehending untoward incident from the applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant was medically examined by the District Medical Board, Crr 154 of 2025 4 Raipur, and it is opined that applicant was on regular medication, and maintaining well. He complains of anxiety and increased heart rate occasionally, which is not a disease but only a disorder. Therefore, applicant is not entitled for release on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the petition, as well as the case-diary. 6. Before considering the case of the applicant, it would be appropriate if Section 12(1) of the Act 2015 is taken into consideration, and for ready reference, the same is being reproduced hereunder: “Section 12:(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 of 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 him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. A plain reading of Section 12(1) of the Act 2015 by itself gives a clear indication that under the normal circumstances, as a matter of routine, in case an accused person happens to be a juvenile and is arrested, detained, and is brought before the Board, such person notwithstanding anything contained in either Code of Criminal Procedure or under any other special law which is in force should be released on Crr 154 of 2025 5 bail. But at the same time the latter part of Sub Section 1 of Section 12 clearly envisages the fact that in a given factual background of a case if it appears to the Court that releasing of said juvenile can bring him into association of the company with which he landed himself in the remand home, or he may get exposed to moral and psychological danger, as also exposing himself to physical danger, the juvenile may not be released. That means, in the event the circumstances surrounding the juvenile shows that upon his release from the observation home can lead to exposing the juvenile to both moral as well as psychological danger, the Court may refuse to release the juvenile on bail. 7. In order to examine whether any of three exceptions of Section 12(1) of the Act 2015 is present in the case, social status report of the applicant was called for by this Court vide its order dated 05.02.2025, and the learned Juvenile Justice Board has also called the same and a copy of which is also filed by the applicant along with covering memo dated 18.03.2025 in the present revision. 8. From perusal of the social status report of the applicant, it appears that the social and economic condition of the applicant’s family is satisfactory, the parents of the applicants are concerned about future of the juvenile applicant. His behaviour was good with his inmates, he denied commission of offence, but he was known to the victim. Cause of delinquency is lack of proper guidance. His involvement in the offence is doubtful, and his treatment from the Psychiatrist is continuing from the Crr 154 of 2025 6 date when he was sent to the observation home, and his condition was not normal. It is clear from the social status report of the applicant that the same is self contradictory. It cannot be said that the parents have concern about future of the applicant, as he committed an act depicting criminal tendency. It cannot be said to be such an act done in a sudden spurt of anger. Applicant took the victim to a place out of range of the CCTV footage on the pretext that she was being called by other teachers, and committed rape upon her. Thereafter, she was being called regularly from her class room by the applicant. This act of applicant shows the criminal tendency in him. More over, applicant went to the house of the victim, and committed rape upon her. The manner in which he acted, and committed the offence cannot be said to be the act done in spurt of anger. Applicant’s parents, are not concerned with welfare of the child, who instead of insisting the applicant goes to school, did not take any care of him. In this situation, if the applicant, who is juvenile in conflict with law is released from the observation home, and sent to the same social economic atmosphere, he would be exposed to moral, and psychological dangers. Further, the risk of juvenile committing such offence in future is also likelihood, because the victim of sexual offence of such tender age, who is a student of the same school, are often not even able to bring the offence to the notice of the elders. I do think the gravity of the offence is nowhere concerned with consideration of bail application of a juvenile in conflict with law, but to consider the interest of justice, it does have some bearing. Crr 154 of 2025 7 9. Although the bail may be a rule but under three circumstances, the benefit of bail can be denied to a juvenile, where rape has been committed on a minor victim, release of juvenile applicant on bail would definitely defeat the ends of justice. One of the exceptional circumstances, wherein the benefit of bail can be denied to a juvenile, is that, in case, “the release would defeat the ends of justice”. Justice is not a one way street. It is only to be appreciated from the point of view of the juvenile in conflict with law. It is also a concept which would be alive both for the victim and for the society at large. The manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, it cannot be said that the juvenile applicant is immature, the length of offence and his conduct does comes under the exception of “defeat the ends of justice”. Further, from the medical report of the juvenile in conflict with law, it appears that the District Medical Board has opined that the applicant was on regular medication and maintaining well. On taking history of the applicant, he complains of anxiety and increased heart rate occasionally. The applicant will under regular follow-up in Psychiatric OPD to assess the mental status and to verify the diagnosis. It also reflects that his condition is normal and stable in the observation home. 10. The instant case taking into consideration, the report of the Probationary Officer, as well as the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that if the applicant is released on bail, there is all chances of his exposing to moral as well as psychological danger, and his release would “defeat the ends of justice”. Crr 154 of 2025 8 11. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the opinion that the finding given by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, as well as the learned Appellate Court does not warrant any interference at this juncture, and the present case does not fall within the ambit of Section 12(1) of the Act 2015 but would fall within the exception carved out in the said Section. 12. Accordingly, no good case has been made out for allowing this revision calling for interference with the order under challenge. 13. The Criminal Revision being devoid of merit, it is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma