Jharkhand High Court
Nandani Kumari vs State Of Jharkhand ......Opp. Party on 5 March, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No.186 of 2025
....
Nandani Kumari, aged about 15 years Daughter of Sri Bhupet
Mandal, Resident of Ghoshaldih, P.O.-Pokharia, P.S.-Purvi Tundi,
District- Dhanbad/ Jharkhand; represented by father- Bhupet
Mandal Son of Chandrabali Mandal, Resident of Ghoshaldih,
P.O.-Pokharia, P.S.-Purvi Tundi, District-Dhanbad/Jharkhand
......Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand ......Opp. Party
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Naveen Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P
For the Informant : Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Raj Nandan Chatterjee, Advocate
......
Order No.03/05.03.2025
This Criminal Revision Application No.186 of 2025 has
been filed on behalf of the Juvenile petitioner by challenging the
judgment dated 31.01.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.23 of
2025 by Sri Rajni Kant Pathak, the learned Special Judge,
Children Court, Dhanbad by which the appeal filed on behalf of
the Juvenile has been dismissed thereby affirming the order dated
20.01.2025 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Dhanbad in
connection with Purvi Tundi P.S. Case No.43 of 2024 by which the
prayer for bail on behalf of the juvenile petitioner has been
rejected.
2. As per FIR, the informant Vijay Mahato was informed by
his nephew Akash Kumar Mahato and Dev Kumar Mahato aged
13 years and 11 years respectively, that his brother Santosh
Mahato has been killed by one Kishan Mahato and the Juvenile
petitioner. Thereafter, the Informant arrived near the pond and saw
his bother Santosh Kumar Mahato has died. It is alleged that his
brother has been killed by means of stone.
3. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the Informant.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Courts
below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It
is submitted that the petitioner is a juvenile minor girl aged around
15 years and she studies in class 10 and is also appearing in her
Board Examination. It is submitted that the Probation Officer has
given adverse report against the petitioner in his report but the
petitioner is a minor girl and as such she may be given the benefits
of beneficial provisions of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, and
lenient view may be taken in favour of juvenile petitioner
irrespective of nature of offence. It is submitted that the petitioner
is a bright student and hence she may be granted bail as she is in
custody since 01.01.2025.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer
for bail. It is also submitted that there is a direct allegation against
the juvenile petitioner for committing the murder of the deceased
and hence the prayer for bail may be rejected.
6. Learned counsel for the Informant has also opposed the
prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner is also involved in
committing the offence along with the other juvenile Kishan
Mahato as they were caught in uncomfortable position by the
deceased Santosh Mahato and as such he was brutally killed by the
Juvenile including this Juvenile Petitioner by the stone.
7. It is further submitted that the Probation Officer has also
pointed out that the release of the juvenile petitioner on bail will
expose her and she may come in contact of known criminal of the
localities and hence the prayer for bail may be rejected.
8. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from
perusal of the records of this case, it appears that the petitioner is
alleged to be involved in the commission of murder of one Santosh
Mahato. However, the Informant is not the eye-witness rather he
has informed about the occurrence by his nephew.
9. Considering the custody of the juvenile petitioner and
considering the facts of this case and taking lenient view in favour
of the petitioner as the juvenile petitioner is a minor girl, the
juvenile petitioner namely Nandani Kumari is directed to be
released in supervision and care of her father on bail on furnishing
bails bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount
each, to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Magistrate,
Juvenile Justice Board, Dhanbad, subject to the condition that one
of the bailer must be the father and the father of the juvenile shall
furnish his personal mobile number before the learned Court
below and file undertaking that he shall produce the Juvenile
petitioner as and when required during the trial before the learned
Court below and the petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of
the District Dhanbad without prior the permission of the Court and
shall not tamper with the evidence.
10. Accordingly, the judgment dated 31.01.2025 passed in
Criminal Appeal No.23 of 2025 by Sri Rajni Kant Pathak, the
learned Special Judge, Children Court, Dhanbad and the order
dated 20.01.2025 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile
Justice Board, Dhanbad in Purvi Tundi P.S. Case No.43 of 2024
are set aside.
11. Thus, this Criminal Revision No.186 of 2025 is allowed
and stand disposed of with the observation mentioned above.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Nishant/-
