1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Criminal Revision No. 936 of 2016

• Ajay @ Ajju Prithwani (Juvenile) S/o Deepak Prithwani Aged About 17

Years Through His Legal- Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Sushila

Prithwani, W/o Deepak Prithwani, Aged About 50 Yeasr, R/o R.D.A.

Colony, Indraprasth Block No. 315/ R, Raipura, Post Office- Raipur,

Police Station- D.D. Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil & District- Raipur,

Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police

Station- D. D. Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Non-applicant

For Applicant

Shri S. Pandya, Advocate

For Respondent/State

Shri Rajendra Tripathi, Panel Lawyer

SB: Hon'ble Shri Justice P.Sam Koshy

Order On Board

03.10.2016

1. The present petition has been preferred under Section 102 of the

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

with 397/401 Cr.P.C.

2. Grievance of the Petitioner is that the present Applicant is in jail in

connection with Crime No. 126/2015 registered as police station D.D.

Nagar, Raipur whereby the Applicant has been charged under Section

307 and 324 IPC. The present Applicant is in Observation Home since

20.09.2015.

3. The allegation against the present Applicant is that the present

2

applicant on 15.07.2015 at around 10.30 said to have assaulted one

Neeraj Rawate as well as Pankaj Rawate. He caused knife injury on the

said two persons. Subsequently the F.I.R. was lodged and he was

arrested.

4. The impugned order reflects that the track record of the applicant does

not show a healthy sign in as much as on earlier occasion when he was

put in the Observation Home he had escaped from the Observation

Home and was again arrested and taken back to the Observation

Home.

5. Thus, in the given factual background and track record of the Applicant

this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail and that the

present case would not fall within the earlier part of the provisions of the

Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act but would fall within the later part

of the said Section.

6. Accordingly, the present Revision Petition being devoid of merits stands

rejected.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy)

JUDGE

kishore