Allowed

Xyz v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 May 2022CRR/141/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of the High Court of Chhattisgarh rectified erroneous bail rejection of a juvenile accused in a sexual offence. The court held that lower courts failed to appreciate the Social Investigation Report, violating statutory requirements, and granted bail pending re-appreciation by the Board.

What did the court decide?

Revision allowed; impugned bail rejection order set aside; bail granted upon furnishing surety of ₹25,000 by natural guardian.

Xyz Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

Criminal Revision No. 141 of 2022

---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh, through P.S.- Magarload, District Dhamtari (C.G.)

¶8

---- Non-applicant ----------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicant : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Singh Chouhan, PL -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶9

Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Chandravanshi Order On Board

¶10

04.05.2022.

¶11

Challenge in this revision petition is to the order dated 21.01.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari in Criminal Appeal No. 02/2022, whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant/juvenile against the order of Juvenile Justice Board, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari dated 12.01.2022 in connection with Crime No. 326/2021 registered at Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari (C.G.) has been dismissed, whereby the applicant/juvenile has been denied bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant/juvenile would submit that applicant is an innocent boy aged about 17 year and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question, as he has not committed the alleged crime. It is submitted that this is the first crime registered against the applicant; he is in observation home since 18.11.2021 and charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, more detention will affect childish mentality of the applicant (Juvenile). He would further submit that main accused of this case namely, Dhanraj Singh, who is adult, has already been granted regular bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court

¶13

¶14

vide order dated 2.5.2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 1762/2022. Nothing adverse has been mentioned against the applicant in the social status report, despite that both the learned Courts below have rejected the bail application of the juvenile, which is erroneous and unsustainable in law. It is further prayed that this revision petition may be allowed and the bail may be granted to the applicant.

¶15

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail application submitting that it is a case of rape and as per social status report, if applicant is granted bail, then there is a chance for further involvement of the applicant/juvenile in such type of crimes, hence, both the Courts below have not committed any error in rejecting the bail application of the applicant, thus, the revision may be rejected.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties, perused the case diary including the Social Investigation Report of the applicant.

¶17

The applicant is in observation home since 18.11.2021 and charge-sheet has already been filed and the co-accused, namely, Dhanraj Singh (adult), who is said to be the main accused of the case, has already been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 2.5.2022 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 1762/2022 and only allegation against the present applicant/juvenile is that he helped the main accused in the crime in question. Learned appellate Court has dismissed the bail application of the applicant assuming that if the applicant is released on bail, it would expose him to physical, psychological and moral danger but nothing has been mentioned in the Social Investigation Report of the applicant/juvenile, which is required to be present for rejecting the bail of the applicant (juvenile) according to proviso to Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Looking to the above fact, the Board as well as the appellate Court, both have

¶18

¶19

committed error in not appreciating the social investigation report properly and rejected the bail of the applicant/juvenile. Hence, I am inclined to allow this revision petition.

¶20

Consequently, the revision is allowed. The order dated 21.01.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari in Criminal Appeal No. 02/2022 is set aside. It is directed that on furnishing a surety of ₹ 25,000/- along with a bond of same amount which is to be of his natural guardian/father/mother, to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice Board, for his appearance as and when directed, then the applicant shall be given in custody of his natural guardian/father/mother.

¶21

One closed envelope has been submitted by counsel for the applicant/juvenile along with memo of revision, which contains particulars of the applicant/Juvenile. The said envelope shall be made part of record of this order.

¶22

Certified copy as per rules.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

(N.K. Chandravanshi) JUDGE

¶25

D/-

Xyz v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Xyz 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

A Juvenile in Conflict With Law Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Xyz Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Abc Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Xyz Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Niraj Sen Vs Smt. Laxmi Sen

Abc Vs State of Chhattisgarh