1 CGHC010170942026 2026:CGHC:41429 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 617 of 2026 ABC (Details is kept in sealed envelop) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan- Gandai, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Khilendra Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Vivek Mishra, Government Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 23/09/2026 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 (hereinafter referred to as the “JJ Act, 2015”), challenging the order dated 10.04.2026 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, C.G. (hereinafter referred to as the “Appellate Court”) in Criminal Appeal No.19/2026, whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant/juvenile has been rejected and the order dated 03.03.2026 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Rajnandgaon, C.G. (hereinafter referred to as the “JJB, Koriya”) in 2 Criminal Case No.43/2026, rejecting the bail application of the applicant/juvenile under Section 12 of the JJ Act, 2015, has been upheld. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the complainant- Deshbandhu Patel, lodged a written complaint at Police Station Khairagarh, District Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.), stating that on 13.01.2026, a fair was being held at the village market square (Chowk), where people from the village and surrounding areas had gathered. At about 7:00 p.m., some persons from Amlidih were engaged in an altercation at the market place. The complainant's cousin namely, Mordhwaj Patel, intervened in an attempt to pacify them. In the meantime, the applicant/juvenile allegedly with an intention to cause his death, assaulted Mordhwaj Patel with a sharp-edged weapon on his abdomen, resulting in a serious injury to his stomach and protrusion of his intestines. Despite treatment, Mordhwaj Patel succumbed to the injuries sustained by him. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, an FIR has been registered against the applicant/juvenile for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The bail application filed by the applicant/juvenile under Section 12 of the JJ Act, 2015 was rejected by the JJB, Rajnandgaon, vide order dated 03.03.2026. Thereafter, the appeal preferred by him was also rejected by the learned Appellate Court vide the impugned order dated 10.04.2026. Hence, this criminal revision. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant/juvenile has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He would further submit that the applicant/juvenile is in observation home since 14.01.2026 and keeping the applicant/juvenile in the observation home for a further period may 3 adversely affect his conduct and behaviour. Hence, it is prayed that the orders passed by the learned Appellate Court as well as the learned JJB, Rajnandgaon, be set aside and the applicant/juvenile be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel would oppose the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submit that the applicant/juvenile is the main culprit, who stabbed the deceased with a knife, causing a grievous injury resulting in protrusion of the deceased’s intestines. He would further submit that, owing to the said injury, the deceased succumbed to the injuries on the same day. It is also submitted that the social status report of the applicant/juvenile is not favourable. Hence, bail application may be rejected. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record along with the case diary and social status report prepared by the Probation Officer in respect of applicant/juvenile. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 8. From a perusal of the case diary, the Social Investigation Report of the applicant, and the material available on record, it prima facie appears that the applicant/juvenile is the main culprit, who allegedly inflicted a knife blow on the vital part of the body of the deceased. The Social Investigation Report is also not in his favour; rather, it recommends that the applicant/juvenile be kept under institutional protection. 9. 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 4 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. 10. In the present case, considering the gravity and nature of the offence, the circumstances in which it was committed, this Court finds reasonable grounds to believe that if applicant/juvenile is released on bail, he is likely to come into association with known criminals and may be exposed to moral and psychological danger. Further, his release at this stage would defeat the ends of justice. Accordingly, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to applicant/juvenile. 11. Consequently, the instant criminal revision is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. 12. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Vasant