A B C Nil vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

The present Revision petition under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short “the Act, 2015”) has been preferred against the impugned order dated 07.08.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court)/Juvenile Justice Board Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. in Criminal Appeal No. 306/2026, upholding the order dated 24.07.2026 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Mana Camp, District – Raipur (C.G.) rejecting the bail application of the applicant in connection with Crime No. 242/2025 registered at Police Station Ganj, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act.

In the present case, there are a total of five accused persons, out of whom three major co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. So far as one juvenile in conflict with law, namely S.T., who is stated to be female, is concerned, her Criminal Revision No. 221 of 2026 has been dismissed as withdrawn by this Bench vide order dated 02.03.2026. The present bail application pertains to the fifth accused, namely V.N., and the same is being taken up for hearing today.

The case of the prosecution is that on 19.09.2025, the police of Police Station Ganj, during patrolling, received secret information that two boys and three girls staying at Pooja Guest House, Narmada Para, were carrying illicit contraband Ganja for the purpose of selling the same. Acting upon the said information, the police conducted a raid and seized 07.00 kg of Ganja from one bag and 07.300 kg from another bag, i.e., a total of 15.100 kg of Ganja. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 19.09.2025.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is aged about 17 years and has been lodged in the Observation Home since 19.09.2025. It is further submitted that three major co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and the quantity of contraband allegedly seized is not commercial in nature. The Social Investigation Report qua the applicant is not adverse to him. It is further contended that there is no likelihood that his release would bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger. The learned Court below has rejected the bail application in a mechanical manner. Hence, considering the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail, however, submits that the Social Investigation Report qua the applicant is not adverse to him.

Section 12 of the Act, 2015 makes it absolutely clear that a child alleged to be in conflict with law should be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person. The only embargo created is that in case the release of the child is likely to bring him into association with known criminals or expose the child to moral, physical or psychological danger or where the release of the child would defeat the ends of justice, then bail can be denied.

Be that as it may, a social status report was submitted by the concerned Probation Officer states the conduct of the applicant is not only good, but he is living in disciplinary manner and the child's education is interrupted, and there is a need to reconnect the child with education. Besides, it does not indicate anywhere in the said report that the release of the applicant on bail would bring him in association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or would otherwise defeat the ends of justice. In view thereof, none of the grounds are thus available to reject the application filed under Section 12 of the Act, 2015. The Courts below have, therefore, committed an illegality in rejecting the application de hors the mandate of the Act, 2015.

Accordingly, the orders passed by the Additional Sessions Judge and the Juvenile Justice Board are set aside, and the Revision is allowed. It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- by the parents/guardian with one local 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.