1 CGHC010214022026 2026:CGHC:40291 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No.706 of 2026 1 - Juvenile in Conflict With Law Nil Applicant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Respondent(s) For Applicant (s) : Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate For Respondent (s) : Mr. Vinod Tekam, GA Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order on Board 15/09/2026 1. This criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant/juvenile under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (henceforth ‘referred as ‘JJ Act’) challenging the order dated 04.04.2026 passed by the learned Upper Session Judge (FTC), Raipur in Criminal Appeal No.119/2026, whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant/juvenile has been rejected upholding the order dated 06.03.2026 passed by the Digitally signed by R NIRALA 2 learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mana Camp, Raipur in Criminal Case No.61/2026, by which the bail application of the applicant/juvenile under Section 12 of the JJ Act was rejected. 2. Facts of the case in nutshell are that on 16.11.2025 at about 3:30 pm, the applicant/juvenile and other co-accused persons abused Harishankar Singh, father of the complainant, and threatened him to kill and looted Rs.500/- from him, while he was returning to his home. When he asked to return the money, the applicant/juvenile assaulted him by means of knife, therefore, he sustained injuries on his chest, thereafter an FIR was lodged at Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur against the applicant/juvenile and the co-accused for the offence under Sections 296, 351 (2), 309, 109 & 3 (5) of BNS. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the applicant/juvenile for the aforesaid offence before the Juvenile Justice Board, Raipur. The bail application filed by the applicant/juvenile was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board, Raipur vide order dated 06.03.2026 and thereafter the appeal preferred by him has also been rejected vide impugned order dated 04.04.2026 (Annexure-A/1) by the learned Upper Session Judge (FTC), Raipur (C.G.). Hence this criminal revision. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant/juvenile would submit that the applicant is juvenile, aged about 16 years and he has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in Observation Home since 3 19.11.2025, charge sheet has already been filed and conclusion of trial may take long time, as such keeping applicant/juvenile for further period in the Observation Home may change his conduct and behavior, hence it is prayed that the orders passed by the learned Appellate Court as well as learned Juvenile Justice Board be set aside and the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant/juvenile. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The social status report has been received from the Probation Officer in respect of the applicant/juvenile, in which it has been stated that the applicant is in Observation Home for 10 months and his conduct and behavior is good and he is required to be kept in supervision of family members. 7. Having considered the aforesaid report and duration of custody of applicant/juvenile in the Observation Home and for the fact that the charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, on due consideration of the aforesaid aspects of the matter, this Court is inclined to allow the instant revision. 8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 04.04.2026 passed by the learned Upper Session Judge (FTC), Raipur and the order dated 06.03.2026 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mana Camp, Raipur are hereby set aside. 4 9. It is directed that if the mother or father of the applicant/juvenile furnishes their own bail bond of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Raipur for appearance of the applicant/juvenile before it, as and when directed by it, the applicant shall be released into the custody of his parents. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Nirala