IMPORTANT POINT
Bail to juvenile delinquent is a rule and refusal exception.

ORDER

The criminal revision petition has been filed by the applicant under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short “the Act”) against the judgment dated 09.04.2026 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, District Guna (M.P.) in Criminal Appeal No. 59/2026, whereby the order dated 02.04.2026 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, District Guna has been affirmed, thereby rejecting the application under Section 12 of the Act , moved on behalf of the revisionist in connection with offences under Sections 103(1), 109(1), 191(2), 190, 296(B), 115(2), 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, registered at Crime No. 181/2026, at Police Station Cantt, District Guna (M.P.).

2. Learned counsel for the applicant/juvenile submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is a juvenile and is in custody since 01.04.2026. Learned counsel further submits that the learned Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate Court have rejected the bail application primarily on the ground of seriousness of the alleged offence without recording any specific material to demonstrate that the release of the juvenile would bring him into association with known criminals or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that her release would defeat the ends of justice. It is submitted that the provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 mandate release of a juvenile on bail unless the case falls within the statutory exceptions. Therefore, in absence of any specific material attracting the exceptions provided under Section 12 of the Act, the continued detention of the juvenile is not justified and the impugned orders passed by the Courts below deserve to be set aside.

3 . On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the criminal revision and supported the impugned orders passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate Court. It is further submitted that considering the gravity of the offence and the manner in which the incident has taken place, the Courts below have rightly rejected the bail application of the juvenile. It is also submitted that if the juvenile is released on bail, her release may defeat the ends of justice. Therefore, it is prayed that the present criminal revision filed by the applicant deserves to be dismissed.

4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, learned State counsel and have perused the material available on record.

5. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 reads as under:

“12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.-

(1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought 6 before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person:

Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person’s release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision.”

6. This Court has also perused the report submitted by the Probation Officer, which forms part of the record. The said report indicates that the possibility of improvement in the conduct of the child in conflict with law under proper care and family supervision ca