Jharkhand High Court
Rohit Saw @ Rohit Sahu vs The State Of Jharkhand ...... Opp. Party on 21 March, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 291 of 2025
....
Rohit Saw @ Rohit Sahu, aged about 16 years, son of Durga Saw @
Durga Sav, resident of Village- Khunti, PO-Khunti, PS- Chowka,
District- Seraikella Kharsawan through his father and natural guardian
Durga Saw @ Durga Sav, aged about 50 years, son of Gopal Sav,
resident of Village- Khunti, PO-Khunti, PS- Chowka, District-
Seraikella Kharsawan ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ...... Opp. Party
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the petitioner : Mr. Praveen Shanker Dayal, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, A. P. P.
.....
ORAL ORDER IN COURT
02/21.03.2025 The present Criminal Revision No. 291 of 2025 has been
filed on behalf of the juvenile-petitioner under Section 102 of the
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015
challenging the judgment dated 18.02.2025 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court),
Seraikella in Criminal Appeal (Bail) No. 08 of 2025 whereby learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court),
Seraikella has dismissed the appeal and rejected the prayer for bail of
the juvenile- petitioner and affirmed the order dated 25.01.2025
passed by the learned Principal Magistrate and the Members of
Juvenile Justice Board, Seraikella in connection with Chowka P. S.
Case No. 60 of 2024 corresponding to G. R. No. 01 of 2025 instituted
for the offences under Sections 25 (1-B) (a) and 26 of the Arms Act,
by which prayer for bail of the juvenile-petitioner was rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the juvenile-petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the juvenile-
petitioner that the impugned judgment and order passed by the
learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the
law. It is submitted that this is a case of recovery of Katta i.e. one
country made pistol. It is submitted that the petitioner is a juvenile
and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the
co-accused Ahmad Ansari in B.A. No. 1137 of 2025 vide order dated
12.02.2025 and the other co-accused Mahabir Kumar Singh in B.A.
No. 1788 of 2025 vide order dated 05.03.2025 respectively have been
granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ambuj
Nath) of this Court. It is submitted that the juvenile-petitioner is in
custody since 04.11.2024 and as such, he may be enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has
opposed the prayer for bail.
5. Heard learned counsel for the both the sides.
6. It appears that this is a case of recovery of one country
made pistol from the petitioner. It also appears that the co-accused
Ahmad Ansari in B.A. No. 1137 of 2025 vide order dated 12.02.2025
and the other co-accused Mahabir Kumar Singh in B.A. No. 1788 of
2025 vide order dated 05.03.2025 respectively have been granted bail
by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath) of this
Court.
7. It further appears that the juvenile-petitioner is in custody
since 04.11.2024.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the
fact that other co-accused namely Ahmad Ansari and Mahabir Kumar
Singh have been granted bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court,
the juvenile petitioner, Rohit Saw @ Rohit Sahu is directed to be
released on bail in care and supervision of his Natural Guardian and
Father namely Durga Saw @ Durga Sav on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile
Justice Board, Seraikella/or his Successor Court in connection with
Chowka P. S. Case No. 60 of 2024 corresponding to G. R. No. 01 of
2025 subject to condition that the father of the juvenile- petitioner
will submit his mobile number and self-attested copy of his Aadhar
Card before the learned Court below, which he will always keep
active and will not change it, during the pendency of this case,
without prior permission of the Court and shall produce the juvenile-
petitioner as and when required.
9. Therefore, in view of the above, the judgment dated
18.02.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-
Special Judge (Children Court), Seraikella in Criminal Appeal (Bail)
No. 08 of 2025 and the order dated 25.01.2025 passed by the learned
Principal Magistrate and the Members of Juvenile Justice Board,
Seraikella in connection with Chowka P. S. Case No. 60 of 2024
corresponding to G. R. No. 01 of 2025 are set aside.
10. Thus, the Criminal Revision No. 291 of 2025 is allowed and
stands disposed of.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Kamlesh/
