1 2026:CGHC:6017 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 84 of 2026 ABC Juvenile In Conflict With Law ... Petitioner versus State of Chhattisgarh through S.H.O., Police Station Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir Champa C.G. ... Respondent For the petitioner : Mr. Anil Tripathi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 03/02/ 2026 1. The present Revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been preferred against the impugned order dated 01.01.2026 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (FTSC) (POCSO), Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir Champa in Criminal Appeal No. 186/2025 upholding the order dated 24.12.2025 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Janjgir Champa (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 445/2025 whereby the bail application of the applicant relating to Crime No.1041/2025 registered at P.S. Janjgir, for the offence u/s ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.02.04 14:15:29 +0530 2 137(2), 65(1), 351(2) of BNS andSection 4 of POCSO Act, 2012 has been rejected. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 25.11.2025 the complainant’s minor daughter/victim had gone away without informing her. After searching the neighborhood and failing to trace the girl, the complainant filed FIR at Janjgir Police St;ation on the same day alleging that she had been enticed away by an unknown person. On such report, crime was registered. During investigation, it was discovered that the juvenile applicant had intimidated and abducted the minor victim, who was under 16 years of age and took her to Chandaniya-Para where she was kept in a house and the applicant had forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her, thereby the offence has been committed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court rendered in case of Juvenile in conflict with law V Versus The State of Rajasthan decided on 14th August, 2024 and submits that both the courts below have not properly considered the essential ingredients of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act and rejected the bail of the juvenile. He further submits that the Social Status Report does not show any negative result for release of the applicant and further there is no likelihood that his release would bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger and it supports the release of the applicant. He further submits that both the learned Courts have in mechanical manner rejected the bail and considering the provisions of the Act, 2015, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the juvenile applicant had taken 3 away the minor girl of 15 – 16 years from the lawful custody of her parents and committed forcible sexual intercourse. 5. The victim along-with her mother appeared through VC from the concerned DLSA and raised objection to grant bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel both the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. In this case, the bail application of the applicant was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate Court mainly on the ground that if the applicant is released on bail there is a possibility of his exposure to moral, physical or psychological danger. The Appellate Court also observed that the juvenile applicant is accused of committing rape with the victim girl. 8. Section 12 of the Act, 2015 makes it absolutely clear that a child alleged to be in conflict with law should 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. The only embargo created is that in case the release of the child is likely to bring him into association with known criminals or expose the child to moral, physical or psychological danger or where the release of the child would defeat the ends of justice, then bail can be denied. 9. Perusal of the Social Investigation Report shows that there were love affairs between the victim and applicant and there was no previous record of criminal antecedents against the applicant and presently the juvenile is regular student of 12th Class and he has to appear in the ensuing academic examination scheduled to be held w.e.f. 16 th February, 2026. 10. On perusal of the record especially the social investigation report 4 which shows that there is no adverse impact for the release of the applicant, I do not find any reasonable ground having been brought before the Juvenile Justice Board or the Police Authorities in respect of the so called threat of the juvenile getting exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger or come in the company of known criminal. 11. In view of above consideration, the impugned order dated 01.01.2026 passed by the appellate court and the order of Juvenile Justice Board, Bilaspur dated 24.12.2025 cannot be allowed to sustain and is set aside. The application u/s 12 of the Act of 2015 is allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail forthwith on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/-, by the parents or guardians of the applicant, as the case may be, to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board for his appearance before the Board, as and when directed. 12. The revision is accordingly allowed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao