REDACTED vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010335842026 2026:CGHC:47016
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRR No.1237 of 2026
1 - XYZ Juvenile In Conflict With Law (Description Of Applicant And The
Name Of Legal Guardian Is Mentioned In A Paper Kept In Closed
Envelope)
Applicant (s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
- Chilfi, District - Mungeli
Respondent(s)
For Applicant (s) : Mr. Sunil Pillai, Advocate
For Respondent (s) : Mr. Siddharth Sharma, PL
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi
Order on Board
05/11/2026
1. This criminal revision has been preferred by the applicant/juvenile
under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 (henceforth ‘referred as ‘JJ Act’) challenging
the order dated 10.07.2026 passed by the learned Additional
Digitally
signed
by R
NIRALA
Session Judge (FTC)/Children Court, Mungeli in Criminal Appeal
No.37/2026, whereby the appeal preferred by the

2
applicant/juvenile has been rejected upholding the order dated
17.06.2026 passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile
Justice Board, Mungeli (C.G.) in Crime No.11/2026, by which the
bail application of the applicant/juvenile under Section 12 of the
JJ Act was rejected.
2. Facts of the case in brief are that the applicant/juvenile, aged
more than 17 years and minor victim, who is also aged more than
17 years were in contact through Instagram and they used to talk
to each other. It is alleged that the applicant/juvenile allured the
victim and took her to Pandariya, Durg, Bhopal and sexually
exploited her and on being report lodged by the father of the
victim, FIR was registered against the applicant/juvenile under
Sections 137 (2), 62 (2) (d), 87, 351 (3) of BNS and Sections 4 &
6 of POCSO Act. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed
before the JJB, Mungeli, which is pending consideration.
3. The bail application filed by the applicant/juvenile was rejected by
the Juvenile Justice Board, Mungeli vide order dated 17.06.2026
and thereafter the appeal preferred by him has also been
rejected vide impugned order dated 10.07.2026 by the learned
Additional Session Judge (FTC)/Juvenile Court, Mungeli (C.G.).
Hence this criminal revision.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant/juvenile would submit that this
is the first conflict with law of the applicant/juvenile and it is a
case of love affair between the applicant/juvenile and victim both
and the medical report is also not supported to the prosecution.

3
The applicant/juvenile is in observation home since 01.04.2026,
charge sheet has already been filed, as such keeping
applicant/juvenile for further period in the Observation Home may
change his behavior, hence it is prayed that the orders passed by
the learned Appellate Court as well as learned Juvenile Justice
Board be set aside and the applicant be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submission made
by the applicant’s counsel and submits that the applicant/juvenile
after taking the victim on various places sexually exploited her.
Hence, he prays that the revision may be rejected, however, he
submits that the social status report of the applicant/juvenile is
not negative.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
available on record.
7. Having considered the fact that the applicant/juvenile is in
observation home since 01.04.2026 and further considering the
medical report and social status report of the applicant/juvenile,
according to which this is the first conflict with law of the
applicant/juvenile and his conduct and behavior in the
observation home has been reported to be good and nothing has
been brought by the prosecution to hold that if the
applicant/juvenile is released on bail, then his release will likely to
bring him into association with any known criminal or expose the
said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or his
release would defeat the ends of justice, therefore, on due

4
consideration of the aforesaid aspects of the matter, this Court is
inclined to allow the instant revision.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 10.07.2026 passed by the
learned Additional Session Judge (FTC)/Children Court, Mungeli
and the order dated 17.06.2026 passed by the learned Principal
Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mungeli are hereby set aside.
9. It is directed that if the mother or father of the applicant/juvenile
furnishes their own bail bond of Rs.25,000/- along with one
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned
Juvenile Justice Board for appearance of the applicant/juvenile
before it, as and when directed by it, the applicant shall be
released into the custody of his parents.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
Nirala