Allowed

Rajkumar Nishad v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC2 Dec 2020CRR/704/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this revision petition, the High Court of Chhattisgarh set aside the bail rejection orders of the Special Court and Juvenile Justice Board, allowing bail for a Class 9 student applicant falsely implicated in Section 307 IPC by furnishing a personal bond and surety.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in like sum by the natural guardian father.

Rajkumar Nishad Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2020)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRR No. 704 of 2020

¶5

Rajkumar Nishad S/o Sanjay Nishad, Aged About 15 Years, Student of Class 9^th , through his natural guardian father Sanjay Nishad, Son of Bhulav Nishad, Aged About 42 Years, Resident of Village Padmi, Police Station and District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner/Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Chhattisgarh, Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Respondent/Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant/Petitioner – Shri Rajkumar Pali, Advocate. For State/Respondent – Shri Adil Minhaj, Govt. Advocate.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board

¶12

02-12-2020

¶13

Heard.

¶14

2 . This revision petition has been brought challenging the order dated 1410-2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.36/2020 by the Special Court (F.T.C.)/ Child Court Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh dismissing the appeal filed by the applicant/petitioner and upholding the order of bail rejection passed by the Juvenile Justice Board.

¶15

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. There is totally no evidence to make out a case under Section 307 of the IPC. The applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is also a student of class 9^th . The social status report had been in favour of the applicant, even then the Board as well as the appellate Court have not appreciated the same and passed orders of rejection, which needs interference by this revision.

¶16

4 . Learned counsel for the State/respondent opposes the submission and submits that the evidence is present against the applicant regarding commission of offence by him. Learned appellate Court as well as the Board have not committed any error. Therefore, the revision petition be dismissed.

¶17

-2-

¶18

5 . Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents.

¶19

Considered the submissions. As it is in the report of the Probation Officer itself that the applicant is a student of class 9^th , although there is mention of some previous incident but there is no police case regarding that incident as the same was resolved in the village society itself. Therefore, I am of this view that there was nothing specific present in the social status report which should have been made a ground for refusal to grant of bail to the applicant. Therefore, I am of this view that the orders passed by the Board as well as the appellate Court are erroneous, which needs interference.

¶20

7 . Therefore, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned order of the appellate Court and the order of the Juvenile Justice Board are set aside and the application for grant of bail to the applicant is allowed. It is directed that on furnishing of a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- by natural guardian father of the applicant with one 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 his natural guardian father.

¶21

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

¶22

Aadil

Rajkumar Nishad v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar Nishad v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pushpraj Ogre Vs Smt. Renuka Ogre

Loknath @ Ramkumar Sahu Vs Lekhram Sahu

Nandkumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Khilendra Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Juvenile in Conflict With Law Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Juvenile in Conflict With Law Vs State of Chhattisgarh