Xx vs The State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 406 Chatt

                                                                          NAFR

                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                CRR No. 1213 of 2022

      Xx

                                                                   ---- Applicant

                                      Versus

      The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police
       Station - Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.

                                                               ---- Respondent

For Applicant : Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate.

For State                   :         Mr. Lalit Jangde, Dy. G.A.



                    Hon'ble Justice Smt. Rajani Dubey

                                Order on Board

19.01.2023

1.      The     applicant       has      preferred    this    revision     under

Sections 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Minor),

2015 read with Sections 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C. agaisnt the judgment

dated 02.11.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC)

Surajpur, District Surajpur in Criminal Appeal No.23/2022 by which

the Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the appeal arising out

of the order dated 14.10.2022 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board

Surajpur, District Surajpur rejecting the bail application filed by the

Applicant in connection with Criminal Case No.75/2022 registered

against him at Police Station Ramanujnagar.

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the daughter of the

complainant was found to be dead on 16.06.2022 in the well of field

of Roopsai, thereafter merg was registered and on investigation, it was found that present applicant/juvenile and other co-accused

have committed rape with the deceased and threw her body in the

well, upon which an offence under Sections 363, 376 & 302 read

with Section 34 of IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children

from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was registered against the

accused person. Subsequently, the accused was produced before

the Juvenile Justice Board Surajpur, where his guardian prayed for

bail but the same was rejected against, which the appeal was also

filed before the Additional Sessions Court (FTC) Surajpur, who by

the impugned order dismissed the appeal. Hence, criminal revision

has been filed.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a

juvenile. He is in custody since 23.06.2022. Charge sheet has

already been filed against him. The social investigation report does

not suggest that on his release he will come in contact with any

known criminal or there would be any danger to his psychological

or physical state of mind. Therefore, he may be extended the

benefit of bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for

grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case

diary and the social investigation report with due care.

6. In this case, the social investigation report of the Probation Officer

does not suggest that release of the Applicant would expose him to

moral, psychological and physical danger. The report shows that

the applicant has no criminal antecedent and does not suggest that

on his release, there is likelihood of bringing him in association with

any known criminal and his release would defeat the ends of justice.

7. Considering the nature of allegation, the facts and circumstances of

the case and the fact that the juvenile Applicant is in custody since

23.06.2022, I am inclined to allow this revision and release the

Applicant on bail.

8. Consequently, the revision is allowed and the impugned judgment

dated 02.11.2022 is set aside. It is directed that the Applicant shall

be released on bail on furnishing a surety for Rs.25,000/- by the

parents or the guardian of the applicant to the satisfaction of the

concerned Juvenile Justice Board for his appearance before the

said Board as and when directed by the Board.

Sd/-

(Rajani Dubey) Judge Deepti Jha