IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 1206 of 2025 Juvenile ‘X’ represented through his father ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party --------

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Baibhaw Gahlaut, Advocate.

For the State : Mr. S.K. Tiwari, Spl.P.P.

------

05/ 16.02.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This criminal revision has been preferred for setting aside judgment dated 09.10.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Bokaro, in Criminal Appeal No. 209 of 2025, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed and also for quashing of order dated 02.09.2025, passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Bokaro, in connection with Chandrapura P.S. Case No. 66 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 64(1), 64(2)(1), 352, 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67-A of the Information and Technology Act, 2000, pending in the Court of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Bokaro.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a juvenile and he was aged about 15 years at the time of alleged crime, wherein the informant was aged about 19 years. He next submits that the petitioner is in remand home since 17.07.2025. He further submits that the date of alleged occurrence is dated 14.02.2024, wherein the FIR has been lodged on 11.07.2025. He also submits that the learned trial court as well as the learned appellate court has been pleased to reject the prayer for bail of the petitioner only on the ground of seriousness of the allegation. He then submits that the petitioner is being represented by his father and his father is ready to give any undertaking and he will take care of the child and he will not allow him to accompany any known criminal and he will not allow him to expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger and he is also ready to swear an affidavit in this regard. He also submits that the petitioner is a student and to buttress his argument, he refers to Annexure-2, which is the marksheet. On these grounds, he submits that regular bail may kindly be granted to the petitioner.

4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the allegations are there against the petitioner.

5. Looking into the contents of the FIR, it transpires that the date of alleged occurrence is dated 14.02.2024, wherein the FIR has been lodged on 11.07.2025 and at the time of alleged occurrence, the petitioner was aged about 15 years and he is in remand home since 17.07.2025 and further his father is representing this petitioner and he is ready to take care of the petitioner and he will not allow him to accompany any known criminal and he will not allow him to expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger and he is also ready to swear an affidavit in this regard.

6. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, deals with bail to juveniles. On perusal of Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015, it is crystal clear that the juvenile can be denied bail only on the following three grounds (i) if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal, or (ii) expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger, or, (iii) the person’s release would defeat the ends of justice.

7. From Section 12 of the said Act, it also transpires that seriousness of the alleged offence or the age of the juvenile are also no relevant consideration for denial of bail above 16 years of age. Section 12 of the Act is applicable to all juveniles in conflict with law without any discrimination of any nature.

8. The Juvenile Justice Act is based on belief that children are the future of the society and in case they go into conflict with law under some circumstances