D. Prem vs State Of Orissa 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 order dated 21.03.2025 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-PO-Children’s Court, Rayagada in BA No.03 of 2025 rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner-cum-CICL in connection with JJC Case No.07 of 2025 arising out of Ambadola PS Case No.284 of 2024 pending in the file of learned Principal Magistrate, JJB, Rayagada for commission of offence punishable U/S.309(4)/3(5) of BNS, on the allegation of snatching away a bag of the complainant containing 500 Grams of gold.

Heard, Mr. Sidhartha Sankar Ray(2), learned counsel for the revision-petitioner and Mr. A. Pradhan, learned Addl. PP in the matter and perused the record.

Admittedly, the petitioner is a Child in Conflict with Law (CICL), but bail to CICL can be refused only if his release on bail 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, but the impugned order does not disclose anything to indicate that the release of the petitioner would bring him into in association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice. The learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-PO-Children’s  Court, Rayagada, in the impugned order has not reflected any such grounds to refuse bail to the petitioner-CICL, however, he has only discussed about the provisions of law and rejected the bail application of the petitioner-CICL by discussing facts on merit, which is not the mandate of Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

It is no doubt true that the petitioner is involved in another case, but that would not be sufficient to detain him in the observation home, unless the conditions as stated above are made out to refuse bail to the petitioner-CICL. Moreover, in this case, substantial part of the stolen article has already been recovered. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstance and considering the law involved for release of CICL on bail, this Court without expressing any view on merit considers it proper to admit the petitioner-CICL to bail.

In the result the Criminal Revision stands allowed and the impugned order so also the order passed by the Principal Magistrate, JJB, Rayagada, refusing to grant bail to the petitioner-CICL is hereby set aside. Consequently, the petitioner-CICL be admitted to bail by the forum in seisin over the matter on such terms and conditions as deems fit and proper including the condition that the parent of CICL shall ensure that the petitioner-CICL shall not commit any offence while on bail.

..............................................