##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.RA/2316/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/12/2025

undefined

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR REGULAR

BAIL) NO. 2316 of 2025

=================================================

MINOR YOGESHBHAI DINESHBHAI SARERIYA THROUGH

DINESHBHAI BACHUBHAI SARERIYA

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

=================================================

Appearance:

DEVANGI B SOLANKI(8888) for the Applicant(s) No. 1

MR. JAYDEEP J. SOLANKI(19128) for the Applicant(s) No. 1

MR UTKARSH SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2

=================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

Date : 30/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Pursuant to service of notice of Rule upon respondent No. 2 –

original complainant, learned advocate Mr. Bhaumik Dholariya

appears on his behalf. He shall file his appearance before the

registry, if yet not filed, which the registry shall accept.

2. This application has been filed by the juvenile in conflict with

law through his father as a guardian under Section 102 of the

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act)

Page 1 of 9

Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Dec 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 06 05:29:07 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.RA/2316/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/12/2025

undefined

for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.

11211050250380 of 2025, registered with Thangadh Police Station,

District: Surendranagar for the offences punishable under Sections

63(A), 64(1)(2)(i)(m), 78(1)(i), 79, 351(2) and 54 of the Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Sections 3(A), 5(L), 6, 12, 16 and

17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012

(POCSO Act).

3. Heard, the learned advocates for the respective parties.

3.1 The learned advocate for the applicant submits that it is a case

of love affair wherein the accused as well as the victim girl both are

juvenile. She fairly conceded that the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB)

as well as the first Appellate Court, both have rejected the bail

application of the juvenile in conflict with law by orders dated

04.10.2025 and 10.09.2025, respectively, and accordingly, present

application is filed seeking regular bail before this Court.

3.2 At the outset, the learned advocate for the applicant has

submitted that the parties have arrived at out of Court settlement and

the original complainant has no objection for release of the present

juvenile in conflict with law on bail.

3.3 Even otherwise, she submitted that the applicant is a minor

and therefore, by virtue of Section 12 of the JJ Act, it would be

mandatory to enlarge the applicant on bail. It is submitted that the

Page 2 of 9

Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Tue Dec 30 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 06 05:29:07 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.RA/2316/2025 ORDER DATED: 30/12/2025

undefined

learned Sessions Judge has failed to appreciate and interpret the

provisions of Section 12 of the JJ Act in the its true and proper

perspective. It is submitted that according to Section 12 of the JJ

Act, a Child (as defined under section 2(12) of the JJ Act), alleged to

have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence and if he is

detained by the police or if he is brought before a Board, such a

person shall be released on bail. It is submitted that though

exceptions carved out in the section does not apply in the facts and

circumstances of the present case, the learned Sessions Judge has not

taken into consideration the said aspect and rejected the appeal of the

juvenile in conflict with law.

3.4 She further submitted that investigation in the crime in

question is over and Charge-sheet is also filed and hence, there is no

question of any tampering or hampering with the evidence.

3.5 The learned advocate for the applicant further submits that

even as per the Report of the Probation Officer, nothing so adverse is

forthcoming on record against the juvenile applicant and his conduct

also appears to be good.

3.6 The learned advocate for the ap