B. Ganesh Reddy @ Ganesh Reddy vs State Of Odisha Vs

G. Satapathy, J

This criminal revision U/S. 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short “the Act”) is directed against the impugned judgment dated 28.11.2024 passed by the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge(Children’s Court), Nabarangpur in Criminal Appeal No.14 of 2024 confirming the order dated 17.10.2024 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Nabarangpur in JC Case No. 28 of 2024 arising out of Nabarangpur PS Case No. 405 of 2024 refusing to grant bail to the revision-petitioner who is a child in conflict with law-cum-CICL for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 103(1)/109/3(5) of BNS, on the main allegation of committing murder of one Kiran Harijan along with other children-in-conflict with law and adult accused persons in the dispute arising out of immersion of Goddess Durga.

Heard, Mr.Suryakanta Dwibedi, learned counsel for the revision-petitioner and Mr.R.B.Mishra, learned Addl. PP and perused the record including the Social Investigation Report and Social Background Report of the child in conflict with law-cum-petitioner.

In the Social Investigation Report, the Legal Probation Officer-cum-District Child Protection Officer, Nabarangpur has inter alia observed the following:-

“19. The socio economical background of the family is average and living under the below poverty line. The CCL having only sister. The CCL father doing as a salesman in a Bengal Shop and earning 200/- per day and his mother doing dry fish selling business in the market. They were living in rented house in Umma Reddy Colony of Soura Sahi. The interpersonal relationship between parent & son is cordial. The CICL is a student of +2 2nd year at B B College, Nabarangpur.

The antecedent of the child is found to be rational. The CCL may be provided with counseling to avoid such types of conflicts in future and considering the age of the CCL, his parents may be advice to take care the CCL properly in order to prevent future conflict and the CCL may be directed to continue his education in the best interest of the child.”

On the other hand on perusal of the order passed by the learned Children’s Court in appeal, it appears that the bail application of the CICL-cum-petitioner has been considered on merits, but law is well settled that bail to child-in-conflict with law can be refused, if there are 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. Admittedly, bail to the CICL is the rule, but his detention is an exception. Further, the materials on record at best discloses the presence of the CICL-cum-petitioner at the spot of occurrence, but the main allegation of giving fatal blow to the deceased is directed against the adult accused person.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstance and after having considered the rival submissions and taking into consideration the proviso appended to Sec. 12 of the Act and keeping in view the detention of the CICL in “Observation Home” and release of other CICL Iswar Raju @ Illu on bail in CRLREV No. 33 of 2025, this Court without expressing any view on merits considers it proper to admit the revision-petitioner to bail.

Hence, the criminal revision stands allowed on contest, but in the circumstance, there is no order as to cost. Consequently, the impugned judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court, so also the impugned order of the learned JJB, Nabarangpur in refusing bail to the CICL-cum-petitioner are hereby set aside and the revision-petitioner-cum-CICL be admitted to bail by the forum in seisin over the matter on such terms and conditions as deems fit and proper.

.………………………………….