Digitally signed by ALLENA ALLENA ANNAJEE ANNAJEE RAO RAO Date:

2026.02.06

10:51:33 +0530

2026:CGHC:5938 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 75 of 2026

1 – ABC (Juvenile) S/o Xyz Aged About 17 Years Nil ... Petitioner versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho, Police Station- Masturi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Respondent For the petitioner : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate For the State : Ms. Avleen Juneja, Panel Lawyer For the complainant : Mr. U.N.S. Chandel, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Order on Board

03/02/ 2026

1.

The present Revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been preferred against the impugned order dated 31.12.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC)/Children Court, Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No. 323/2025 upholding the order dated 09.12.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge Juvenile Justice Board, Bilaspur (C.G.) in Crime No. 736/2025 registered at P.S. Masturi, District Bilaspur for the offence u/s 109, 61(2), 3(5) of BNS and sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, was rejected.

2.

(i) As per the prosecution case, on 29.10.2025 a report was lodged by the complainant at P.S.Masturi, District Bilaspur that on 28.10.2025 at about 05.55 in the evening he was sitting along with his maternal uncle and 9-10 persons and they were discussing things.. At that time, 2 unknown persons started firing on them from a distance of about 10-15 feet with intention to kill them from the right and left sides of vehicles parked on road. The complainant and all those sitting there fled to save their lives. A bullet pierced into Raju Singh’s left knee and a finger on his left hand, causing injury near his waist. The two unidentified assailants fired indiscriminately with pistols, intending to kill the complainant Raju Singh. Both the assailants wearing handkerchiefs over their mouths, fled towards Bilaspur Road after the shooting. On such complaint, the crime was registered. During investigation, the juvenile applicant was found to be involved in the incident, he was arrested on 29.10.2025 and detained in the observation Home in Bilaspur.

(ii) The applicant had filed application u/s 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act before the Juvenile Justice Board, which has been rejected by order dated 09.12.2025, against which, he had filed appeal. The appellate Court has rejected the appeal and affirmed the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board by impugned order dated

31.12.2025. Hence this appeal.

3.

Learned counsel for the juvenile applicant submits that the witnesses have not identified the juvenile as assailant and the allegation of conspiracy is not clear and on the basis of his memorandum, motor cycle was seized from him. He has relied on a decision of the Supreme Court in Juvenile in Conflict with Law V Vs. The State of Rajasthan decided on 14^th August, 2024 and submits that the learned courts below have not considered the phraseology used in sub-section 1 of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act while rejecting the bail application. He further submits that as per Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, bail to the juvenile is a rule and refusal of the same is an exceptional. Therefore, considering the provisions of Section 12 of the Act and in view of the above cited decision, the applicant may be released on bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that in connivance with the other adult accused, the juvenile applicant has also participated in commission of serious offence and the motorcycle used by the applicant in the offence has been seized from him.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record.

6.

Section 12 of the Act, 2015 makes it absolutely clear that a child alleged to be in conflict with law should be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit pers