Rahul Mandal Alias Rahul Kumar Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

2025:JHHC:27488

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.324 of 2025

¶3

Juvenile ‘X’ through his mother … Petitioner Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim through guardian … Opp. Parties --------

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶6

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Shekhar Pd. Sinha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl.PP. For the Victim : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate ------

¶7

5/10.09.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned

¶8

counsel appearing for the State as also learned counsel appearing for victim.

¶9

This Criminal Revision has been preferred against the Order dated 19.02.2025 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I-CumChildren Court, Deoghar, in connection with Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 2 of 2025, arising out of Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No. 54 of 2023 dated 13.10.2023 for alleged offence U/s 376, 34 of I.P.C. and Section 67, 67A of the I.T. Act, in connection with Enquiry No. 208 of 2024 (Enquiry No. 159/2025), whereby the prayer made by the Petitioner for grant of regularly bail was rejected and the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar has been upheld.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was juvenile aged about 17 at the time of alleged occurrence, i.e. of 13.10.2023. He submits that the petitioner is nephew of the informant and false allegations are made against the petitioner. He submits that the conjugal life of the informant is not

¶11

1

¶12

2025:JHHC:27488

¶13

going on well and for that, she lodged a criminal case being Deoghar Magomunda P.S. Case No.46 of 2023 dated 15.06.2023 under Section 498-A and other Sections of IPC. He submits that the child born out of the said wedlock has forcibly taken by the husband and thereafter the husband was taken in custody.

¶14

He submits that the husband was granted regular bail in the aforesaid case on 14.01.2025 in B.A. No.8631 of 2024. The bail was granted on the condition that on that day, the child was handed over to the informant and thereafter the husband was granted bail. He submits that this circumstance clearly suggests that the allegation made in the FIR is not correct as it has been alleged that by keeping the knife on the child, the alleged crime has been made, however the child was not there along with the informant and the child was handed over to the informant on 14.01.2025, whereas the present case has been lodged on 13.10.2023. He further submits that even there is no medical report and that has also not come in the impugned order passed by the learned Courts. He further submits that both the learned Courts have been pleased to reject the bail application only on the ground of gravity of the allegation.

¶15

He further submits that the petitioner is in remand home since 28.10.2023 and the petitioner is being represented by his mother and the mother is ready to give any undertaking to the effect that the child will not be exposed to any moral, physical and phycological danger. On this ground, he submits that the bail may kindly be granted.

¶16

2

¶17

2025:JHHC:27488

¶18

Learned counsel appearing for the State and victim have vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations are there, even certain photographs have been taken. In view of that the learned courts have rightly passed the order considering the gravity of the allegation against the petitioner.

¶19

Admittedly the petitioner was aged about 17 years. He is in remand home from 28.10.2023. In the FIR, the allegations are made that by keeping knife on the child, such crime has been committed; however, it transpires from the order of Coordinate Bench in B.A. No.8631 of 2024 dated 14.01.2025 that on that day, the child was handed over to the informant and this the present case is registered on 13.10.2024, which prima facie suggest that the child was not present along with the informant and in the garb of child, the present case has been lodged when the medical reports are also not on record.

¶20

For rejecting the bail, three ingredients in light of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 are required to be considered, deals with the bail to juveniles (i) if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal, or (ii) expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger, or, (iii) the person’s release would defeat the ends of justice.

¶21

From Section 12 of the said Act, it also transpires that seriousness of the alleged offence or the age of the juvenile are also no relevant consideration for denial of bail above 16 years of age and

¶22

3

¶23

2025:JHHC:27488

¶24

is alleged to have committed a heinous offence is also entitled to get bail under section 12 of the Act, 2015. There is no classification, whatsoever, provided in Section 12 of the Act, 2015 with regard to grant of bail. Section 12 of the Act is applicable to all juveniles in conflict with law without any discrimination of any nature.

¶25

In view of above discussions, the Court is satisfied that the reasoning and conclusion of the learned appellate court as well as Juvenile Justice Board is that there is likelihood that the petitioner will come into the association of dreaded criminals and there is likelihood of moral, physical and psychological danger of the petitioner if released on bail not founded on reasonable grounds.

¶26

The gravity of allegation has not been properly appreciated and the mandatory provision of Section 12 of J.J. Act, 2015 as well as other provisions relating to the juvenile has declined to grant bail to the juvenile on the basis of unfounded apprehension. In the absence of any material or evidence of reasonable grounds, it cannot be said that his release would defeat the ends of justice and have failed to give reasons on three contingencies for declining the bail to the revisionist. The findings recorded by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as appellate court are based on gravity of crime.

¶27

Thus, the Order dated 19.02.2025 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I-Cum-Children Court, Deoghar, in connection with Criminal (Juvenile Bail) Appeal No. 2 of 2025, arising out of Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No. 54 of 2023 and order dated 09.01.2025 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board,

¶28

4

¶29

2025:JHHC:27488

¶30

Deoghar are not sustainable in the eye of law and hence both the orders are set aside and the present criminal revision is allowed.

¶31

In view of that, this Criminal Revision Petition is allowed.

¶32

Since the revisionist is in observation home since 28.10.2023, he is directed to be released on bail via assurance and surety given by his natural guardian/mother in connection with Deoghar Cyber P.S. Case No. 54 of 2023, after furnishing a personal bond of his mother with two sureties of her relative each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar, subject to the following conditions: -

¶33

(i) Natural guardian/mother will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionist will not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical, or psychological danger and further that the father will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

¶34

(ii) Natural guardian/mother will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level which he would be encouraged to do besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits.

¶35

(iii) Juvenile and natural guardian/mother will report to the Probation Officer on the third Monday of every calendar month commencing with the third Monday of September, 2025, and if during any calendar month the third Monday falls on a holiday, then on the following working day.

¶36

(iv) The Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the

5

2025:JHHC:27488

R.Kumar

activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar, on such a periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.

¶41

As such, this Criminal Revision is disposed of. Pending I.A. if any stands disposed of.

¶42

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶43

6

Rahul Mandal Alias Rahul Kumar Mandal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Mandal Alias Rahul Kumar Mandal v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Vishwamitra Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajesh Kumar Shaw Alias Rajesh Sao Vs the State of Jharkhand

Laldeo Lohra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Krishna Kumar Thakur Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rohit Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sadhana Jaipuriar Alias Sadhana Jayapuriar Vs the Central Bureau of Investigation