Abc Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:27296

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 586 of 2026

¶5

1 - ABC Juvenile In Conflict With Law (Details Of The Petitioner In Closed Envelope)

¶6

... Applicant

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Birra, Distt. Sakti Chhattisgarh (Also Mentioned In Impunged Judgment As State Of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate (Police Station Birra) District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh)

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Mr.	Vivek Kumar Shrivastava, Adv.
For Respondent/State : Mr .	Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G.A.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

02/07/2026

¶14

1 . None appeared on behalf of the victim though notice has been served.

¶15

2 . The Revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short “the Act, 2015”) has been preferred against the impugned order dated 16.04.2026 passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, Janjgir, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)

¶16

Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.07.03 10:21:28 +0530

¶17

2

¶18

in Criminal Appeal No. 40/20265, upholding the order dated 08.04.2026 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Janjgir, District – Janjgir Champa (C.G.) rejecting the bail application of the applicant (KY @ P) in connection with Crime No. 111/2025 registered at Police Station Birra, District – Janjgir Champa for offence punishable under Sections 103(2), 61(2)A, 238 of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) Act.

¶19

3 . In this case there are total 9 accused persons in which 2 are juvenile and 7 are major. As per the prosecution’s case, based on the report of Jitendra Baghel, Crime was registered at Birra Police Station. During investigation, it was found that on 06.09.2025, the appellant, a juvenile in conflict with law, along with other adult accused, conspired and killed Mahendra Baghel, the complainant's brother, by strangling him with a gamcha, and disposed of his body and motorcycle in a river to destroy evidence. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 09.09.2025.

¶20

4 . Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in crime in question. He further submits that there is no direct evidence available on record against the appellant and only on the basis of circumstantial evidence i.e. memorandum statements of other co-accused persons, he has been implicated. Other 4 co-accused persons, including 3 major co-accused and one juvenile out of 9 accused persons, have already been granted bail by this Court. The social status report

¶21

3

¶22

is his favour. Further, there is no likelihood that his release would bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger. The learned Court below have in mechanical manner rejected the bail. Considering the provisions of the Act, 2015, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶23

5 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for the grant of bail and submits that one motorcycle of the deceased has been seized from the present applicant.

¶24

6 . Section 12 of the Act, 2015 makes it absolutely clear that a child alleged to be in conflict with law should be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person. The only embargo created is that in case the release of the child is likely to bring him into association with known criminals or expose the child to moral, physical or psychological danger or where the release of the child would defeat the ends of justice, then bail can be denied.

¶25

7 . Be that as it may, a social status report was submitted by the concerned Probation Officer states the conduct of the applicant is not only good, but he is living in disciplinary manner and the child's education is interrupted, and there is a need to reconnect the child with education. Besides, it does not indicate anywhere in the said report that the release of the applicant on bail would bring him in association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or would otherwise defeat the ends of justice. Furthermore, the alleged

¶26

4

¶27

scarf (Gamchha) or other incriminating material has not been seized from the applicant. Out of 9 accused persons, 4 coaccused persons have already been granted bail by this Court. In view thereof, none of the grounds are thus available to reject the application filed under Section 12 of the Act, 2015. The Courts below have, therefore, committed an illegality in rejecting the application de hors the mandate of the Act, 2015.

¶28

8 . Accordingly, the orders passed by the Additional Sessions Judge and the Juvenile Justice Board are set aside, and the Revision is allowed . It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- by the parents/guardian with one local 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/her guardian. Along with the bail bond, copies of the Aadhar Card and coloured Post Card full size photo shall also be submitted by the applicant as well as by the surety, which shall be duly verified by the trial Court.

¶29

9 . It is observed that the person stands as surety will furnish an undertaking that the applicant shall not come in contact with any bad element and in case, if he is found to be indulged in any unlawful act, the surety/parents of the applicant shall inform to the concerned Police Station.

¶30

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶31

H.L. Sahu

Abc v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

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

Durgesh Aaditya Vs State of chhattisgarh

Naresh Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deepak Kumar Gadhewal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakky Chandra Vs Durgesh Kumar Chandra

Vatan Gupta Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Shrawan Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh