Allowed

Juvenile in Conflict With Law v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC2 Dec 2020CRR/709/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision petition challenged the bail rejection order of the Juvenile Justice Board and the Additional Sessions Judge. The High Court held that considering the gravity of the offence was a ground never contemplated under Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act. The Court found no material in the social status report to deny bail.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; bail granted on furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- by natural guardian.

Juvenile in Conflict With Law Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2020)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRR No. 709 of 2020

¶5

Juvenile in conflict with law, Through Natural Guardian Kursoram Baghel (Father), R/o Village Ulnar Pujari Para, P.S. Nagarnar District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar (Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Revisioner/Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Nagarnar, District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar (Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Respondent/Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant/Revisioner – Shri Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For State/Respondent – Shri Gurudev I. Sharan, 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 2909-2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.29/2020 by the Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.)/ Child Court Bastar at Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh dismissing the appeal filed by the applicant/revisioner 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 had been nothing against the applicant in the social status report given by the Probation Officer, which was not appreciated by the Board as well as the appellate Court. Both Courts have given consideration to the allegation present against this applicant which is not meant to be considered while considering on grant of bail under Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. Therefore, the orders passed are erroneous. Hence, interference is prayed for.

¶16

4 . Learned counsel for the State/respondent opposes the submission and submits that the Board as well as the appellate Court both have not committed any error. The statement given by the prosecutrix under Section 164 of the

¶17

-2-

¶18

Cr.P.C. is clear against the applicant. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶19

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

¶20

Considered the submissions and facts of the case. Specifically on

¶21

perusal of the social status report it is found that there was nothing specific against the applicant present in the report given by the Probation Officer to make out a case of rejection of bail prayer under the proviso to Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. It appears that the Courts below have considered on the gravity of the offence which is never a ground for consideration under Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. Therefore, I am of this view that the orders passed by the Board as well as the appellate Court refusing grant of bail to the applicant are erroneous.

¶22

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.

¶23

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

¶24

Aadil

Juvenile in Conflict With Law v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juvenile in Conflict With Law v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

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

Rajkumar Nishad Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Juvenile in Conflict With Law Vs State of Chhattisgarh