IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

CRLREV NO.310 of 2025

(An application U/S. 438 & 442 of BNSS, 2023 r/w Sec. 102 of the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of

Childrens’ Act, 2015).

Govinda Purty …. Petitioner

-versus-

State of Odisha …. Opposite Party For Petitioner : Mr. D.K.Sahoo, Advocate For Opposite : Mr. C.Mohanty, Addl.PP

Party

CORAM:

JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

F DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT:01.09.2025 (ORAL)

G. Satapathy, J.

1. Although this criminal revision has been filed against the order passed by the PO Childrens Court, but it should have been a Criminal Appeal. However, it is the substance, but not the form to which a Court has to take into consideration and appropriate relief, to which the party (the child in conflict with law-cum-petitioner) is entitled to should

not be withheld merely because the application has been filed under wrong nomenclature.

2. In this case, the criminal revision U/S. 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short “the Act”) as filed by the child-in-conflict with law-cum-petitioner is directed against the impugned order dated 07.05.2025 passed by the learned 1^st Addl. District Judge-cum-PO Children’s Court, Baripda in CT Case No. 18 of 2021 arising out of Raruan PS Case No. 69 of 2021 refusing to grant bail to the revision-petitioner who is a child in conflict with law (CICL) for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 376(2)(n)/376(3)/365 of IPC & Sec. 6 of POCSO Act, on the main allegation of committing rape and aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon the victim on the false assurance of marriage.

3. Heard, Mr.Deepak Kumar Sahoo, learned counsel for the revision-petitioner and Mr.C.Mohanty, learned Addl. PP and perused the record.

4. Admittedly, the impugned order refusing to grant bail has been passed on merit, but bail to juvenile can be refused, if there exists reasonable grounds to believe that the release of the CICL would bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice. It, therefore, appears that the impugned order being passed on merit without having recourse to the aforesaid principle of law which has been laid down in Sec.12 of the Act. In the meantime, the victim girl has already been examined in this case, but the CICL- petitioner is in observation home since 03.05.2021 and the trial is still going on.

5. In such view of the matter, since right to speedy trial being the fundamental right of a person accused of an offence and trial having not yet been concluded even after four years of detention of the CICI-petitioner, this Court without expressing any opinion on merit considers it proper to admit the revision-petitioner to bail.

6. Hence, the criminal revision stands allowed on contest, but in the circumstance, there is no order as to cost. Accordingly, the impugned order in refusing bail to the CICL is hereby set aside and consequently, the revision-petitioner-cum-CICL be released on bail by the Court in seisin over the matter on such terms and conditions as deems fit and proper.

(G. Satapathy)

Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 1^st September, 2025/Kishore Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: KISHORE KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 02-Sep-2025 10:31:52