Digitally signed by SYED SYED ROSHAN R ZA O M SH IR A N ALI ZAMIR ALI D 20 a 2 te 5 :

.11.17

14:39:29 +0530

2025:CGHC:55739 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No.1348 of 2025

1. ABC Nil ... Applicant (Juvenile conflict with law)

versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Dharsiwa, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Galib Dwivedi, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Govt. Advocate SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Order On Board

14/11/2025

1. This revision petition under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short 'the Act of 2015') is filed against the order dated 13.8.2025 by which learned Chief Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Raipur (CG) dismissed Criminal Appeal No.403/2025 filed by applicant against the order dated 22.9.2025 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Mana Camp, Raipur (for short 'the Board') in Criminal Case No.314/2025 rejecting application of applicant for grant of bail to him in connection with Crime No.146/2025 registered at Police Station Dharsiva, Raipur (CG) for the offences under Sections 103 (1), 238, 61 (2) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that dead body of a female was found lying in agriculture field of one Anil Verma in village Mohdi. On that basis, merg intimation was recorded. During course of merg inquiry, dead body was identified to be of Sarita Yadav and it was found that cause of death is because of injuries caused by steel spoon, which was recovered from spot. Police registered case against unknown person under Sections 103 (1), 238, 61 (2) of BNS. During investigation, it was gathered that there was love affair between deceased and appellant, however, six months prior to incident, deceased had stopped talking to applicant and annoyed with that, applicant along with other accused, planned to commit murder of Sarita. In execution of such planning, on 20.3.2025 at about 11.40 to 12.00 midnight applicant phoned Sarita and called her. They took her on motorcycle to the spot, there applicant tried to kill by pressing her neck, however, when she raised alarm, applicant took out one steel spoon from his pocket, assaulted on her neck repeatedly and committed her murder. Applicant, a juvenile in conflict with law, was arrested and in his statement recorded by police, he confessed his guilt of committing murder of deceased.

3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. There is no direct evidence connecting the applicant with murder of deceased. FIR has been registered against unknown person and applicant has been arrested merely on the basis of memorandum statement of co-accused. He submits that the gravity of offence committed cannot be a ground to decline bail to a juvenile. The Courts below have not appreciated the fact that applicant is juvenile and entitled to get benefit of the provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 (for short ‘the Act of 2015’). He submits that there is no evidence to show that if the applicant is released on bail, then his release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal, or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger, or that his release would defeat ends of justice. Hence, applicant may be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposing the submissions of learned counsel for applicant, would submit that applicant has admitted in his statement that he has committed murder of deceased Sarita Yadav. There is one criminal antecedent of applicant. Release of applicant is likely to expose him to moral or psychological danger and as such, his bail application has rightly been rejected by the Board and the Court below. Hence, present criminal revision filed on behalf of applicants (juvenile) be dismissed.

5. At this stage learned coun