[2026:RJ-JP:12596] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 2206/2025 Child In Conflict With Law R, (Time Of Occurrence Aged About 17 Years,) S/o Op Resident Of Himmatgarh Ka Tapra Nahargarh, Police Station Nahargarh District Baran At Present Tejaji Ka Danda Bhanwargarh P/s Bhanwargarh District Baran Through Natural Guardian Father Op S/o Gl Resident Of Himmatgarh Ka Tapra Tehsil Kisanganj District Baran (Raj. (At Present Confined In Judicial Custody At Juvenile Home, Baran) ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhim Singh Meena For Respondent(s) : Ms. Manju Dave, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 25/03/2026 The instant criminal revision petition under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (referred to as 'the Act of 2015' hereinafter) has been filed against the order dated 30.10.2025 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, No.1, Baran (Raj.) (referred to as 'the Appellate Court' hereinafter), in Criminal Appeal No.07/2025, whereby the Appellate Court had dismissed the appeal filed by the juvenile and the order dated 21.08.2025 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Baran, District Baran (Raj.) (referred to as 'the Trial [2026:RJ-JP:12596] (2 of 3) [CRLR-2206/2025] Court' hereinafter) dismissing the application filed under Section 12 of the Act of 2015, was upheld. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the juvenile- petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged offence(s), he has falsely been implicated in the case and he is in observation home since 22.07.2025. Counsel further submits that the statements of the parents of the victim have been recorded during enquiry, however, the statement of the victim under Section 183 of B.N.S.S. has not been recorded yet. Counsel further submits that the age of the juvenile is 17 years and keeping the present juvenile in observation home for a long time will put their future in limbo. Trial is likely to take long time to conclude. Thus, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the juvenile in the Observation Home for a long time. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the revision petition and submitted that there is clear allegations against the present petitioner-juvenile of forcibly raping the victim. This awful act of the juvenile clearly shows that his parents have no control over the juvenile, therefore, the revision petition deserves to be dismissed. Heard learned counsel for the both the parties and perused the material made available on record, Report of the Probation Officer, statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 of B.N.S.S. & the statements of her parents recorded during enquiry wherein there are clear allegations against the petitioner-juvenile of forcibly raping the victim. This awful act of the juvenile indicates that his parents have no control over him at all and, in [2026:RJ-JP:12596] (3 of 3) [CRLR-2206/2025] such a case, release of the juvenile would defeat the purpose of justice. Looking to the overall facts & circumstances of the case, and the statement of victim recorded under Section 180 of B.N.S.S. & statements of her parents, this Court is not inclined to allow the revision petition filed on behalf of the juvenile-petitioner & the same deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the present revision petition is dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J SAURABH /07