XYZ vs State Of Chhattisgarh

The present Revision petition under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short “the Act, 2015”) has been preferred against the impugned order dated 25.11.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO Act), Raigarh, (CG) in Criminal Appeal No.79/2022, upholding the order dated 16.11.2022 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board rejecting the bail application of the applicant in connection with Crime No.534/2022 registered at Police Station Sarangarh District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh for offence punishable under Section 363, 366, 376 of the IPC and Section 4 & 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

The prosecution case is that the applicant who is a juvenile aged about 17 years, took the prosecutrix aged about 17 years, on his motorcycle on 23rd October 2022 in the evening, therefore, a missing report has been lodged. After recovery of the prosecutrix, it was revealed that the applicant took the prosecutrix to his relative’s house where physical relation was made. Therefore, on such allegations, offence has been registered.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant (juvenile) is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Both the applicant and the prosecutrix are of the same age group and they have love affair, however, due to pressure of the parents, offence has been registered. The applicant is in custody since 2.11.2022. Both the Courts in a mechanical manner rejected the bail application. Learned trial Court should have considered that as per Section 12 of the Act, the juvenile may be released on bail, as the applicant has no criminal proclivity and there is no reason to believe that the release of the applicant is likely to bring him into association with any criminal. Therefore, learned counsel prays for releasing the applicant on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail. However, he fairly submits that social investigation report is in favour of the applicant and he is not involved in any criminal activity.

Having considered the submissions, particularly considering the fact that the applicant and the complainant, both, are of the same age group, as also considering the length of pre-trial detention, there is no criminal antecedents of the applicant and social investigation report is in favour of the applicant wherein it is only mentioned that there is some lack of discipline in the applicant, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, the Revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 25.11.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh and the order dated 16.11.2022 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Raigarh are quashed. It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- by the parents/guardian with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned court, for appearance of the applicant as and when directed, the applicant shall be given in custody of the said guardian. Along with the bail bond, copies of the Aadhar Card and coloured Post Card full size photo shall also be submitted by the applicant as well as by the surety, which shall be duly verified by the trial Court.

It is observed that the person stands as surety will furnish an undertaking that the applicant shall not come in contact with any bad element and in case, if he is found to be indulged in any unlawful act, the surety/father of the applicant shall inform to the concerned Police Station.