Chhattisgarh HC Grants Bail To Juveniles Accused In 9-Kg Ganja Case After Nearly Four Months In Observation Home

The two juvenile applicants were charged under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act after 9 kg of ganja was allegedly seized from a vehicle in which they were travelling with three adult co-accused.

Their applications for bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (“JJ Act”) were rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board, and the appellate court upheld those rejections.

In revision, the applicants relied on their juvenile status, the fact that this was their first conflict with law, their time in the observation home since 30 June 2026, and the filing of the charge sheet.

One applicant’s social-status report was described as not negative, though it noted contact with persons having criminal backgrounds; the other applicant’s report had not been received.

Section 12 of the JJ Act governs bail for a person alleged to be in conflict with law and provides for release, subject to the statutory exceptions concerning likely association with a known criminal, exposure to moral, physical or psychological danger, or release defeating the ends of justice; the court applied these grounds in assessing bail.

Section 102 of the JJ Act provides the basis for the High Court’s revisional jurisdiction.

The alleged offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act formed the background to the proceedings, but the judgment did not treat the charge alone as a basis to deny bail.

The High Court considered the applicants’ first conflict with law, their custody in the observation home, the filed charge sheet, and the available social-status material.

Although one report referred to contact with persons of criminal background and the other report was unavailable, the Court found that the prosecution had not established that release was likely to bring either juvenile into association with a known criminal, expose them to danger, or defeat the ends of justice.

Given those circumstances, continued detention was not justified and the revisions were allowed.

It directed that the applicants be released into their parents’ custody upon their mother or father furnishing a bail bond of ₹25,000, with one surety for the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board; the applicants must appear before the Board as and when directed.