RANCHI, India, Nov. 28 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Oct. 30:
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and, learned counsel for the State.
2. This criminal revision has been filed under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 for setting aside the Judgment dated 09.06.2025 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I-cum Spl. Judge (Children's Court), Gumla in Cr. Appeal No.17 of 2025 in connection with Gumla P.S. Case No.184 of 2023, registered under Section 366A, 376DA of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 4 & 6 of POCSO Act, pending in the Court of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gumla, whereby the learned Juvenile Justice Board by order dated 16.04.2025 has been pleased to reject the bail application of the petitioner, which has been affirmed by the learned 1st Appellate Court by the Judgment dated 09.06.2025.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a juvenile and he was aged about 17 years 05 months at the time of alleged occurrence. He further submits that although the allegation against the petitioner is heinous, however, the petitioner has already remained in custody since 05.06.2023 and he is in custody near about 02 years 04 months. He further submits that the petitioner is represented by his father and the father is ready to give any undertaking to the effect that the he will not allow the petitioner to expose him to moral, physical and psychological danger. He also submits that the Social Investigation Report was called by the learned Court, and nothing adverse is found there and the report is in favour of the petitioner. He also refers to Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and submits that both the learned courts have not appreciated the said section in its right perspective. He submits that only on apprehension that the petitioner will come in company of the persons of criminal mind and there is likelihood of moral, physical and psychological danger, the bail of the petitioner has been rejected. He further submits two coaccused persons, identically situated have been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Revision No.1405 of 2023 by order dated 02.05.2024 and in Cr. Revision No.1399 of 2023 by order dated 18th April 2024. He then submits that the petitioner may kindly be released on bail.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the allegation against the petitioner is very heinous in view of that, bail may kindly be rejected.
5. It is admitted position that the petitioner was aged about 17 years 05 months at the time of alleged occurrence and the petitioner is in custody since 05.06.2023, near about 02 years 04 months. Petitioner is being represented by his father and the father is ready to give undertaking to the effect that the petitioner will not be exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816xxvmzqzOk32Bt8Q7xc%2Fu7%2FpoYrmiKGIN%2B%2BYsD39QgXPm&caseno=Cr.Rev./722/2025&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010209692025&state_code=7&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
