Abc Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:480

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

CRR No. 1522 of 2025

¶6

Abc Nil ... Petitioner

¶7

versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, Police Station - Telibandha, Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For the petitioner : Mr. Krishna Kumar Dixit, Advocate For the State/respondent : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocate

¶9

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board

¶10

05/01/2026

¶11

This is second revision petition filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short 'the Act 2015') against the order dated 20.06.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 220/2025 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Raipur, District Raipur (C.G) has rejected the appeal u/s 101 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

¶12

The first revision (CRR No. 826 of 2025) has been dismissed for nonprosecution by order dated 22.07.2025.

¶13

The prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant Ku. Sanjana

¶14

2

¶15

Verma who is cousin of deceased lodged a complaint to the effect that on 31.10.2024 in the evening, she had gone to the house of her elder mother Santoshi Sonwani along with her cousin Krish Verma (deceased) on the occasion of Diwali festival. After eating sweets, Krish Verma was sitting on the platform outside the house of Santoshi Sonwani. At the same time, at around 7.30 pm, accused Anish Thakur, Bajaj Sahu and Chhabi Devangan of the same locality came and seeing Krish Verma hurled abuses at him in filthy language citing the names of his mother and sister. Thereafter, accused Bajaj Sahu hit Krish Verma’s leg with an iron pipe, due to which Krish Verma fell on the ground from platform. Then all these three accused together caught Krish Verma and pressed him on the ground and with the intention of killing him and Anish Thakur & Chhabi Devangan assaulted Krish Verma in the chest with a sharp knife. Injured Krish Verma was brought to the District Hospital, Pandri Raipur, where the doctor examined him and declared him dead. It is alleged that the death of deceased was caused by assault and injuries inflicted by Anish Thakur, Bajaj Sahu, and Chhabi Dewangan. Based on such report, FIR was registered vide Crime No.695/2025. The present applicant who is juvenile has been taken into custody based on memorandum statements of main accused Chhabi Dewangan, Anis Rajput & Bajaj Sahu and after the memorandum statement of juvenile-appellant was recorded.

¶16

The applicant filed an application under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act for granting bail before Juvenile Justice Board, Mana Camp, Raipur, which was dismissed. Against the said dismissal, an appeal was preferred, which has also been dismissed. Hence, this revision.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the name of the

¶18

3

¶19

juvenile applicant was not mentioned in the FIR and even no seizure of weapon was made from him. He further submits that the social status report is not against the juvenile’s release. He next submits that the applicant is in Jail since 30.10.2024 and till date out a total witnesses 18 witnesses, only two have been examined and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of the case.

¶20

He further submits that the Juvenile Justice Board as well as the Appellate Court have completely ignored to consider the statutory scheme of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 which itself is pari materia of Section 12 of the Act of 2000 while considering the application for grant of bail u/s 12 of the Act of 2015. He further submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that in view of provision contained in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

¶21

Counsel for the State submits that the order passed by the two Courts below are fully justified and the provisions of Section 12 of the Act does not warrant any interference and the instant revision deserves to be dismissed. He further submits that the social status report does not categorically supports the release of the applicant.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel both the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶23

On perusal of the record I do not find any reasonable ground having been brought before the Juvenile Justice Board or the Police Authorities in respect of the so called threat of the juvenile getting exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger or come in the company of known criminal. Further considering the fact that the FIR does not mention the name of this juvenile applicant and no seizure was shown to be made from him and further looking to the long custody period, it is a fit case where the juvenile can be released

¶24

4

¶25

on bail.

¶26

In view of above consideration, the impugned order dated 20.06.2025 passed by the ASJ (FTC) Raipur and the order of Juvenile Justice Board dated 29.03.2025 cannot be allowed to sustain and are set aside. The application u/s 12 of the Act of 2015 is allowed. The applicant shall be released on bail forthwith on furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 25,000/-, by the parents or guardians of the applicant, as the case may be, to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board for his appearance before the Board, as and when directed.

¶27

The revision is accordingly allowed.

¶28

Sd/(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶29

Rao

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?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surekha Patre Vs Dhaneshwar Kurre

Shani Kumar @ Karyanand Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Brijesh Tiwari

Nohar Prasad Dansena Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sant Kumar Chouhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jitendra Kumar Kunde Vs State of Chhattisgarh