1 2026:CGHC:2841 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 30 of 2026 GHI (The Name And Address Of Applicant Separately Filed In Close Envelop) ... Applicant. versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Takhatpur, District Bilaspur C.G. ---- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sandeep Yadav, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Rishi Raj Pithawan, Dy. GA. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order On Board 16/01/2026 1. Challenge in this revision is to the order dated 14.11.2025, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No.285/2025 (Annexure A-1), whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant/juvenile against the order of Principal Magistrate/Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, 2 Bilaspur, dated 01.11.2025, has been dismissed, whereby the applicant has been denied bail. 2. Brief facts of this case are that a report/complaint was lodged by the complainant/victim on 24.10.2025 before the concerned Police Station mentioning therein that on 12.07.2025, one of the co-accused/child had called the complainant/victim to his house and sexually assaulted her; thereafter, applicant alongwith other co-accused children have started blackmailing her stating that her obscene video has been made by them and they will viral said video if she doesn't come to meet them and subsequently on 23.10.2025 said video has been shared on the social platforms. Based on report, FIR was registered against the applicant including other co-accused children. The present applicant has been arrested on 24.10.2025 for offence under Sections 64, 3(5) of BNS, Sections 4 and 15 of the POCSO Act and Section 67-B of the IT Act. There are 4 accused persons in this case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and no offence has been committed by him and he is minor, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State Counsel opposes the submission made by counsel for the applicant would submit that there is specific 3 allegation against the applicant of committing the alleged offence/crime with minor victim. Hence, looking to the nature of offence, applicant may not be released on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Pursuant to order of this Court, victim and her mother appeared before this Court and they raised no objection in granting bail to the applicant. 7. Perusal of document/report shows that there is no adverse remarks made against the applicant by the probation officer. 8. Considering facts of this case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, fact that probation officer has not made any adverse remarks against the applicant, particularly that other co-accused children/persons have granted bail by this Court, victim and her mother appeared before this Court and they raised no objection in granting bail to the applicant, further considering the provisions of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015, applicant is in observation home since 24.10.2025, I am inclined to allow the revision petition and release the applicant on bail. 9. Consequently, the revision is allowed. The impugned orders of the Session Court as also Juvenile Justice Board are hereby set aside and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond by his 4 natural guardian, in the sum of Rs.10,000/-, with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned. The applicant shall appear before the Board concerned as and when directed. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J.