1 2026:CGHC:1072 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1489 of 2025 1 - Xyz (Juvenile In Conflict With Law) S/o B (As Per Section 74 Of Juvenile Justice Care And Protection Of Children Act, 2015) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Civil Line, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Chandrikaditya Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant(s) : Mr. Sumit Singh, Dy. Advocate General. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on board 07/01/2026 1. The present Criminal Revision has been preferred against the judgment dated 17.11.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.289/2025, by the learned Additional Session Judge (FTC) and Children Court, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, upholding the order dated 10.11.2025 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Bilaspur, rejecting bail application of the applicant in connection with Crime No.884/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District Bilaspur, for the offence punishable under Section 296, ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2026.01.08 10:30:09 +0530 2 351(2), 115(2), 109, 103, 191(2), 191(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case is that on 01.08.2025 the complainant lodged a report to the police that at about 10:00 pm when he was going to Uslapur Railway Station, his brother Mahesh Yadav informed him that the co- accused Samir Ansari and his friends have assaulted him by some objects. He immediately rushed to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur and then his brother informed him that the friends of Samir Ansari has assaulted him by some objects. The FIR has been registered for the offence under Section 296, 115(2) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023. During the investigation the injured Mahesh Yadav has died and the offence of Section 109, 103, 191(2), 191(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act were added. The applicant was taken into custody on 05.08.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicant is juvenile. It is also submitted that the deceased was also of the same age group. He further submits that apart from this case, there is no criminal antecedent of the present applicant. The applicant is in the observation home since 05.08.2025 and therefore he may be enlarged on bail taking into consideration the provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail. However, he fairly submits that social investigation report is in favour of the applicant and present is first criminal case registered against him. 3 5. Counsel for the applicant relies upon the Judgment of Dayasagar Yadav @ Sagar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh1 wherein in para-6, this Court has observed as under:- “The scope and object of provision regarding grant of bail to a Juvenile as envisaged under Section 12 of the Act came up for consideration before the Single Judge of this Court in the case of Bharat @ Bhrat & Another (supra), wherein it was held that the use of word "Shall" by the legislative provisions in the Section 12 of the Act is of great significance and which raises a presumption that the particular provision is imperative and makes it manifest that ordinarily the Board is under obligation to release the Juvenile on bail with or without surety, but the Juvenile shall not be so released in certain circumstances as latter part of the Section also uses the word "Shall" imposing certain mandatory conditions prohibiting the release of the Juvenile by the Board. It has also been held that ordinarily the bail has to be granted to the Juvenile and would be liable to be rejected only when it appears to the Board that either of the three conditions mentioned in Section 12 of the Act are existing. 6. The said observation of the court was based upon the decisions rendered in case of Akhilesh Kumar Vs. State of C.G.2 as well as judgment delivered by the MP High Court in case of Rahul Mishra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh3. 7. 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 1 2011(1) CGLRW-140 2 2006 (1) CGLJ 305 3 2001 Cri LJ 214 4 criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. 8. A plain reading of the said section 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 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 the releasing of the said juvenile can bring him into the 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. 9. 9. Considering the total facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the applicant being juvenile is already in observation home; considering the fact that there is no past criminal record and also keeping in mind the fact that if the applicant is released on bail, there is no chances of coming into association with known bad company which could further expose him to moral as well as psychological danger, further it also appears that there was no criminal motive or intention on the part of the applicant, this court is of the opinion that it is a fit case where the applicant can be released on bail. 10.Accordingly, the criminal revision is allowed. The orders passed by the court below are set aside. It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- by the parents/guardian with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice 5 Board for appearance of the applicants as and when directed, the applicant shall be given in custody of the said guardian. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok