ORDER :

1. This Criminal Revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children), Act 2015 (for Short “Act of 2015”) has been filed challenging the legality, judicial propriety and correctness of order dated 05.05.2022 passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Children Court Bilaspur(CG), in Criminal Appeal No.73/2022 whereby the Ld. Court dismissed the criminal appeal preferred by the applicant against the order dated 20.04.2022 passed by Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, Bilaspur (CG) dismissing the application for grant of bail by the applicant under Section 12 of Act of 2015..

2. The case of prosecution in brief, is that the complainant lodged a report alleging that on 24.02.2022 at about 5:35 pm when he was sitting in the garden of Samta colony with his friends Naveen Mahadeva, Uday Chakardhari, Harish Meshram and Dadu Yadaw, some persons juvenile-conflict-with-law and their friends from Talapara came there and some hot talk took place among them. It is further alleged that on the very next day i.e. on 25.02.2022 again the accused persons came and assaulted the complainant and his friends, due to which they sustained grievous injuries. Injured was taken to the hospital where one Navin Mahadeva was declared dead and another injured Uday Chakardhari was admitted in the hospital in serious condition. On the basis of said complaint aforesaid offence have been registered against the accused persons.

3. Learned senior counsel for the applicant juvenile-conflict-with-law vehemently argued that the provisions of Section 12 of Act of 2015 mandates that “the juvenile shall be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of the probation officer or under the care of any fit person. Provided that such person shall not be released on bail if there appears reasonable ground 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”. In the case, in hand, learned Court below has given a finding that looking to the seriousness of the offence, appeal is dismissed and the Court below has not considered the provision of Section 12 of Act of 2015 in its proper perspective and thereby committed irregularity while rejecting the appeal. He further submits that in order to find out the physical and mental status of juvenile in conflict with law there is a provision under Section 14 and 15 of Act of 2015. He submits that the provision of Section 15 was considered and the finding under Section 15 of the Act of 2015 has already been given by Juvenile Justice Board to try the offence before the Juvenile Justice Board and not before the Children Court, therefore, the revision should be allowed and the applicant should be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is a categorical finding recorded by learned Court below with regard to the seriousness of the offence and also given a finding that in the interest of justice, the applicant juvenile-conflict-with-law shall not be released on bail. She further submits that these findings are based on proper assessment of the material placed before it and therefore the finding recorded does not suffer from any patent illegality or material irregularity warranting interference by this Court.

5. Learned counsel for the objector submits that the offence is serious in nature and allegation for committing a crime by the accused persons are also apparent from the injury caused to the deceased and one injured and the law requires that not only the rights of the juvenile in conflict with law but also the right of the victim has to be looked into. To buttress his submission, he placed reliance upon the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in CRR No.364 of 2014 decided on 06.12.2016.

6.