Allowed

Abc v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 May 2022CRR/983/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed revision petition challenging rejection of bail for juvenile. Court set aside orders denying bail due to lack of requisite evidence in Social Investigation Report to justify detention of juvenile, directing release on bail with surety to grandparent.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order denying bail set aside; applicant granted bail with surety of Rs. 20,000 from grandparent.

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

CRR No. 983 of 2021

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

CRR No. 983 of 2021

----Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Amleshwar, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

---- Respondent

¶11

For Applicant :- Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate For Respondent-State :- Mr. Amit Singh Chouhan, PL

¶12

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

¶13

04/5/2022

¶14

Challenge in this revision petition is to the order dated 09.7.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4^th F.T.C., Durg District Durg in Criminal Appeal No. 1301/2021, whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant/juvenile against the order of the Juvenile Justice Board, Durg dated 16.6.2021 in connection with Crime No. 49/2021 registered at Police Station Amleshwar, Durg District – Durg (C.G.) has been dismissed, whereby the applicant/juvenile has been denied bail.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant/juvenile would submit that the applicant is an innocent boy aged about 17 years and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further

¶16

¶17

CRR No. 983 of 2021

¶18

submitted that this is the first case registered against the applicant; he is in Observation Home since 13.5.2021 and charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, more detention will affect the childish mentality of the applicant (juvenile). As per social status report, applicant has not committed any misconduct during custody in the Observation Home. 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. Therefore, it is prayed that looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, revision petition may be allowed and the bail may be granted to the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that father and mother of applicant have died and he is living along with his grandfather, therefore, if bail is granted to him, he may be handed over to his grandfather.

¶19

On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant stating that due to the rape committed by the applicant, prosecutrix/victim is carrying 8 months pregnancy, hence, looking to the nature and gravity of the offence both the Courts below have rightly dismissed the bail of applicant.

¶20

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

¶21

The applicant is in Observation Home since 13.5.2021 and charge-sheet has already been filed. The Social Investigation Report shows that this is the first act of applicant in conflict with law and no other case has been registered against him. Learned Appellate Court has dismissed the bail application of the applicant by assuming

¶22

¶23

CRR No. 983 of 2021

¶24

that if the applicant is released on bail, it would expose him to physical, psychological and moral danger but nothing has been mentioned in Social Investigation Report of applicant which is required to be present for rejecting the bail of applicant (juvenile) according to the proviso to Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Therefore, I find that orders of rejection passed by the Board as well as the Appellate Court are not sustainable and needs interference, hence, I am inclined to allow this revision petition.

¶25

Consequently, the revision is allowed. The order dated 09.7.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, 4^th F.T.C., Durg District Durg in Criminal Appeal No. 1301/2021 is set aside. It is directed that on furnishing a surety of ₹ 20,000/along with a bond of same amount which is to be of his natural grandfather, 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 grandfather as has been stated that father and mother of the applicant (juvenile) have been died.

¶26

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.

¶27

Certified copy as per rules.

¶28

SD/-

¶29

(N.K. Chandravanshi) Judge

¶30

Ayushi

Abc v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abc 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 State of Chhattisgarh

Xyz Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Niraj Sen Vs Smt. Laxmi Sen