IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ‘Txxxxx’ (name withheld being child in conflict with law) ... Appellant Versus State of U.T. Chandigarh ... Respondent

1. The date when the judgment is reserved 12.02.2026 2. The date when the judgment is pronounced 16.02.2026 3. The date when the judgment is uploaded on the 16.02.2026 website

4. Whether only operative part of the judgment is Full pronounced or whether the full judgment is pronounced

5. The delay, if any, of the pronouncement of full Not applicable judgment, and reasons thereof CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Suresh Kumar Dhiman, Advocate, for the appellant.

Mr. Arav Gupta, APP, UT, Chandigarh.

***

MANISHA BATRA , J .

1. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant who is a child in conflict with law against the order dated 16.11.2024 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children Court, Chandigarh in case arising out of FIR No.37 dated 23.02.2023 registered under Sections 302, 307 and 34 of IPC at Police Station Sector 11, District Chandigarh, whereby the prayer made by the appellant for grant of regular bail had been declined.

2. The facts relevant for the disposal of this appeal are that on 23.02.2023, on receipt of information regarding admission of one Lovish in General Hospital, Sector 16, Chandigarh and then about referring him to PGI, a police party had reached at Trauma Centre, PGI wherein father of the above mentioned victim Lovish recorded his statement to the effect that the victim who was studying in 9^th class, had left his house at about 8 PM by informing that he was going to meet his friend Tanish. Sometime thereafter, he came to know that his son was found lying in an injured condition and was taken to hospital, he had rushed there and found that someone had stabbed his son Lovish in an abdomen with intent to kill him. He also disclosed that Tanish had met him in the hospital and told that the child in conflict with law “R” (name withheld) had called him on the same evening informing that he would bring Lovish to Tanish. Initially, a case under Section 307 of IPC was registered. Investigation proceedings were initiated. The victim succumbed to his injuries on the same day. Offence under Section 302 of IPC was added.

3. As per the further allegations, the statement of brother of the victim who was an eye-witness had been recorded. The present appellant along with CCL “R” and the co-accused were apprehended on 24.02.2023.

The knife used in the commission of crime was recovered at the instance of CCL “R”. It was revealed that while the CCL “R” had struck blows with the said knife on the person of the victim, the appellant had caught hold of him from behind. The blood stained shirt of the appellant was also recovered at his instance. Investigation now stands completed. The appellant had filed an application for grant of regular bail which was dismissed by the learned Children Court by observing that the release of the appellant on bail would defeat the ends of justice.

4. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by learned Children Court, the present appeal has been filed.

5. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the impugned order dated 16.11.2024 is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is liable to be set aside as while passing the same, the learned Children Court did not take into consideration the fact that the appellant was a juvenile as on the date of occurrence and as such in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (For short “Act, 2015”) was entitled to be extended benefit of bail as a matter of right. There was nothing on record to show that his release on bail was likely to defeat the ends of justice. There was no material to show that he was likely to be exposed to any moral, physical or psychological danger or was likely to come into association with any known criminal. No injury on the person of the victim ha