1 CGHC010181872026 2026:CGHC:32348 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 648 of 2026 • Bd (Child In Conflict With Law Juvenile) Nil ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Deputy AG (Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal) Order on Board 28/07/2026 1. The present criminal revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short, “the Act, 2015”) has been preferred by the applicant against the impugned order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raipur, District Raipur, C.G., in Criminal Appeal No.157/2026, affirming the order dated 18.03.2026 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mana Camp, District Raipur, C.G., whereby the bail application of the applicant was rejected in connection with Crime No.24/2026 registered at Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur, C.G., for the offences punishable under Sections 18(b) and PRIYANKA VERMA Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2026.07.28 16:00:11 +0530 2 22(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “NDPS Act”). 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 15.01.2026, the police received secret information that three boys were roaming near Expressway Road, Muktidham, Raipur, on a motorcycle and were searching for customers to sell narcotic substances. On the basis of the said information, the police reached the spot and apprehended all three persons, including the present juvenile. Upon search, it is alleged that 71.84 grams of opium was recovered, while a small packet containing alleged brown sugar weighing 0.81 grams was recovered from the possession of the present juvenile. Thereafter, the aforesaid offences have been registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, is innocent, and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is not involved in the alleged crime. It is also submitted that the applicant has been in the observation home since 15.01.2026. He also submits that as per the prosecution case, only 0.81 grams of alleged brown sugar was recovered from the possession of the present applicant, which is less than 1 gram. He further submits that the other child in conflict with law was granted bail by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act), Raipur (C.G.), on 23.04.2026. He contends that there is no likelihood that his release would bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to any moral, physical, or psychological danger. It is further submitted that the learned trial Courts have rejected the bail application of the applicant without proper consideration, Therefore, considering 3 the provisions of the Act, 2015, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. He submits that, if the applicant is released on bail, he may again indulge in similar offences. Therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. 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. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant, and that he has no criminal antecedents, coupled with the fact that the applicant has been in the observation home since 15.01.2026, i.e., for about six months, and without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the orders passed by the Special Judge and the Juvenile Justice Board are set aside, and the criminal revision is allowed. It is directed that upon the applicant furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- through his parents/guardians, along with one local 4 surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance as and when directed, the applicant shall be released into the custody of his parents/guardians. Along with the bail bonds, copies of the Aadhaar Cards and coloured passport-size photographs of the applicant as well as the surety shall also be submitted, which shall be duly verified by the trial Court. 9. 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 they are found to be indulged in any unlawful act, the surety/father of the applicant shall inform to the concerned Police Station. Sd/- (Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge Priyanka