1 2026:CGHC:4666 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1246 of 2025 1 - E S/o F Aged About 17 Years (As Per Section 74 Of The , Of The Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2015, the name of the petitioner and his father have been encrypted) ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ranchirai, Distt. Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Yashkaran Singh, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Aman Tamboli, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Judgment on Board 28/01/2026 1. The present criminal revision filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.02.02 19:10:41 +0530 2 short ‘the Act of 2015’) against the impugned judgment dated 13.08.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTSC) POCSO, Balod, District Balod, in Criminal Appeal No. 82 of 2025, whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant “E son of F” under Section 101 of the Act of 2015 was rejected and the order of rejection of bail by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Balod dated 30.05.2025, in Criminal Case No.63 of 2025 is affirmed. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant admittedly is a juvenile and he is in observation home since 13.05.2025. It is further submitted that as per Section 12 of the Act of 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 learned Appellate Court has dismissed the bail application of the applicant considering the merits of the case, but the same would have no relevance while considering the bail application of the juvenile. He would also submit that there is no possibility that after releasing him on bail, he will again come in association of known 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. There are total 8 accused persons in the scene of crime and 4 of them are juvenile. Moreover, nothing has been seized from the present 3 applicant and the main accused is Lakshya Thakur @ Lukky. The applicant is in the observation home since 13.05.2025. He further submits that 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. The learned Court below have in mechanical manner rejected the bail. Considering the provisions of the Act, 2015, the applicant may be released on bail. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for the grant of bail as the appellant has been identified by one person namely Satish in the TIP. However, as per the social investigation report submitted by the Legal Co-Probation Officer, District Rajnandgaon, regarding the appellant E, the children in conflict with law, are shown to be 17 years old. According to the investigation report, the incident occurred due to a poor environment around their home. The family situation is normal, and the appellant E has studied up to Class 10th. Due to the stubborn nature, the incident occurred as he is going to a wedding with his friends without informing the family. The above social investigation report does not mention any association or association between the children and any other adults, nor is there any mention of his previous involvement in any criminal activities. Nothing has been seized from the present applicant. Since the children is 17 years old, it is reported that it is appropriate for them to be kept with their families. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the 4 material available on record. 5. 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. 6. Be that as it may, a social status report was submitted by the concerned Probation Officer. A bare perusal of it would show that the appellant is residing at a poor environment around his home and the family situation is normal, the appellant E has studied up to Class 10th and the child's education is interrupted. Besides, it does not indicate anywhere in the said report that the release of the applicant on bail would bring him in association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or would otherwise defeat the ends of justice. In view thereof, none of the grounds are thus available to reject the application filed under Section 12 of the Act, 2015. The trail Court as well as appellate Court have, therefore, committed an illegality in rejecting the application de hors the mandate of the Act, 2015. 7. Accordingly, the orders passed by the Additional Sessions Judge and the Juvenile Justice Board are set aside, and the Revision is 5 allowed. It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- by the parents/guardian with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, for appearance of the applicant as and when directed, the applicant shall be given in custody of the said guardian. Along with the bail bond, copies of the Aadhar Card and coloured Post Card full size photo shall also be submitted by the applicant as well as by the surety, which shall be duly verified by the trial Court. 8. It is observed that the person stands as surety will furnish an undertaking that the applicant shall not come in contact with any bad element and in case, if he is found to be indulged in any unlawful act, the surety/father of the applicant shall inform to the concerned Police Station. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Ravi Mandavi