Abc Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

This criminal revision has been preferred by the Juvenile-ABC under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 being aggrieved with the impugned order dated 23.10.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.77/2024, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Additional Charge-FTC, Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.) arising out of order dated 09.10.2024 passed in Crime No.187/2024 by the Juvenile Justice Board, Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.), whereby the bail application of the Juvenile-ABC has been dismissed.

¶15

VASANT Digitally signedby VASANTKUMAR KUMAR Date:2025.03.0117:00:00 +0530

¶16

2

¶17

Brief facts of this case are that father of the victim/prosecutrix has lodged a written complaint against the present applicant and other coaccused persons alleging therein that on 01.09.2024, when the prosecutrix along with her friends went to Mudekela Market where her friends have recognized the prosecutrix with accused persons and when she was returning her house alongwith her friends in the evening, the accused persons were standing nearby place and caught hold the prosecutrix and taken her behind the rock and they have committed rape with her in which, other co-accused persons have also helped them. Hence, FIR has been lodged against the accused persons including present applicant/juvenile for the offence punishable under Section 70(2) and 126(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 5 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶18

After lodging FIR on 03.09.2024, the concerned police have started investigation and the applicant being juvenile was sent to the Juvenile Home and charge sheet has been filed against him.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the impugned order is contrary to the facts, law and circumstances of this case. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the case, he has not committed rape with the prosecutrix/victim. He further contended that as per medical report, no injury was found in private part of the prosecutrix which shows that offence of gang rape was not committed by the accused persons. The incident was occurred on 01.09.2024 however,

¶20

3

¶21

her father has lodged report on 03.09.2024 as such there is delay in lodging of FIR. In the MLC, it was found that no definite opinion can be given regarding recent sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. The report of the Probation Officer filed before the Juvenile Justice Board does not indicate anywhere that their release would bring them in association with any known criminals or expose them to moral, physical or psychological danger or would otherwise defeat the ends of justice. It is, therefore, prayed that, the impugned order passed by the Court below may kindly be set aside and the application filed under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 may kindly be allowed and the applicant/juvenile- ABC may kindly be released on bail, in the larger interest of justice.

¶22

Learned State Counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant/juvenile-ABC and submits that the applicant may not be released on bail.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection.

¶24

Perusal of the documents would show that it is a case of gang rape as seven persons committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. Therefore, considering the entire facts & circumstances of the case and looking to the gravity of offence which is of commission of rape. Therefore, considering the fact that the way the offence has been committed which is of a serious nature of committing rape that too in the company of other co-accused persons. Further considering the age

¶25

4

¶26

of the revisioner as he was aged about 15 years at the time of commission of offence, it shows that if the applicant is released on bail, he may again come in contact with those co-accused persons/known criminals and he released on bail, he may again commit any henious offence and may cause danger to the society, as it has been mentioned in the social investigation report that the applicant has given up his studies and has started consuming liquor. Therefore, considering all these circumstances giving bail to the revisioner would be a miscarriage of justice.

¶27

In view of the above circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the orders passed by both the Courts below and release the revisioner on bail.

¶28

Accordingly, the instant revision of the applicant filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, is rejected.

¶29

Consequently, the present CRR stands disposed of.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶32

Vasant

Abc v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abc v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank Vs Rohit Agrawal

Vijay Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nikhil Vishwas Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pawan @ Palendra Ratre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Kukreja Vs Smt. Soumya Kukreja

Sheetal Kumar Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh