The court emphasized the importance of a juvenile's social investigation report and the duration of custody in bail decisions, granting bail based on the absence of adverse findings.

ORDER :

SANJAY PRASAD, J.

This Criminal Revision has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children Act, 2015) by challenging the judgment dated 15.02.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 03 of 2024 by Sri Janardan Singh, then learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- Godda by which learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- Godda has dismissed the appeal filed by the juvenile –petitioner and rejected the prayer for bail of the juvenile petitioner and affirmed the order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Godda in connection with Thakurganti P. S. Case No. 60 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. No. 85 of 2024 for the offences under sections 364 and 34 of the I.P.C. and later on added under sections 302 and 201 of the I.P.C..

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Courts below are illegal and arbitrary and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the petitioner is a juvenile and committed no offence. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. It is submitted that the petitioner’s name transpired only on confession of the Co- accused Rohit Kumar Ram, who is the brother of the juvenile-petitioner. It is submitted that the dead body of the deceased Sanyukta Devi was recovered on the confession of Co-accused Rohit Kumar Ram. It is submitted that petitioner is in custody since 07.11.2023 and hence, the juvenile-petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the juvenile-petitioner has actively connived with the co-accused Rohit Kumar Ram and hence, the prayer for bail of this juvenile petitioner may be rejected.

5. Perused the F.I.R., Lower Court Records of this case, Social Investigation Report of this juvenile-petitioner and considered the submission of both the sides.

6. It appears that there is dispute between the informant and other family members of the Informant and Co-accused Rohit Kumar Ram used to reside in the house of the deceased.

7. It appears that during investigation the co-accused Rohit Kumar Ram was arrested and who confessed his guilt.

8. It appears that the petitioner alleged to have assisted the co-accused in disposal of the dead body of the deceased. It appears that there is nothing adverse against the juvenile-petitioner in his Social Investigation Report.

9. Considering the facts and in the circumstances of the case and considering the period of custody of the juvenile-petitioner, the juvenile petitioner- Manish Kumar is directed to be released on bail in care and supervision of his Natural Guardian and Father namely Ram Kamal Ram on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Godda/or his Successor Court in connection with Thakurganti P. S. Case No. 60 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. No. 85 of 2024 subject to the condition that one of bailor should be close relative and 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.

10. Therefore, in view of the above, the judgment dated 15.02.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 03 of 2024 by Sri Janardan Singh, then learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- Godda and the order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Godda in connection with Thakurganti P. S. Case No. 60 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. No. 85 of 2024 are set aside.

11. Thus, the Cri