Orissa High Court
Ccl vs State Of Odisha on 28 February, 2025
Author: G. Satapathy
Bench: G. Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No.1268 of 2024
(In the matter of an application Under Section-101(5) of
Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015)
CCL .... Appellant
-versus-
State Of Odisha .... Respondent
For Appellant : Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. K.Das, Advocate(Informant)
Mr. S.K Rout, Addl. PP
CORAM:
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT:28.02.2025(ORAL)
G. Satapathy, J.
1. This Criminal Appeal in the nature of bail
application by the Appellant-Petitioner who is a Child
in Conflict With Law (In Short “CICL”) is directed
against the impugned order dated 24.10.2024 passed
by the learned Presiding Officer, Children’s Court,
Nayagarh in TR No.132 of 2024 refusing grant bail to
the CICL in connection with Juveline Case No. 16 of
CRLA No.1268 of 2024 Page 1 of 6
2024 arising out Bhitamati PS Case No. 148 of 2024
for commission of offences punishable U/Ss.
363/366/376(2)(n)/376(3)/294/323/506/34 of IPC
read with Sec. 4(2) and 6(1) of POCSO Act on the
main allegation of kidnapping the victim aged about
less than 16 years and committing rape and
aggravated penetrative sexual assault upon her
2. Heard, Mr. Amitav Tripathy, learned
counsel for the Appellant-Petitioner,
Mr. Karunakar Das, learned counsel representing the
Informant and Mr. S.K. Rout, learned Addl. Public
Prosecutor and perused the record including the
Social Background Report(SBR) prepared by Child
Welfare Police Official and the Social Investigation
Report(SIR) prepared by Legal-Cum-Probation
Officer, District Child Protection Unit, Nayagarh as
produced by the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor in
the matter.
3. After having considered the rival
submissions upon perusal of the record, there
CRLA No.1268 of 2024 Page 2 of 6
appears no dispute with regard to allegation against
the Appellant for committing certain offences under
IPC & POCSO Act, but fact remains that the allegation
appearing against the Appellant arises out of love
relationship between two adolescents. It is to be
borne in mind that the intentions of legislature in
POCSO Act is not to criminalize the romantic
relationship between two adolescents, but to prevent
the child-victim from the rigors of the offences, the
legislature has enacted the POCSO Act. It also
appears from the SIR in this case that the victim and
the Appellant are two teenagers under 18 years of
age and they being in courtship had indulged in some
kind of relationships as alleged, but bail to a CICL can
be refused under three contingencies as enumerated
in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care &
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short, “the Act”)
which provides that unless the release of the CICL on
bail is likely to bring him into association with any
known criminal or expose him into moral, physical
CRLA No.1268 of 2024 Page 3 of 6
and physiological danger and his release would defeat
the ends of justice, he should not be detained in
observation home by curtailing his personal liberty. In
this case, the SIR clearly reveals that the release of
CICL on bail would physically harm him and his life
may be in danger, but Mr. K. Dash, learned counsel
for the informant informs the Court that there is good
and harmonious relationship between the family
members of the victim and the CICL. It is, however,
needs to be emphasized by the parents of the victim
and the CICL that they should discourage the two
adolescents from indulging in any kind of activities
which will land them in trouble and they should not
be get married till they attains the required age as
prescribed under law because the learned counsel for
the Informant-victim informs this Court that a
proposal for marriage of the CICL and victim has
been mooted by their family members.
4. The learned Children’s Court has refused
bail to the CICL by taking note of the fact that the
CRLA No.1268 of 2024 Page 4 of 6
parents of CICL have failed to keep away him from
criminal association and they are not looking after his
education and, therefore, release of the CICL on bail
will definitely expose him to physical and
psychological danger and thereby defeating the ends
of the justice, but fact remains that the aforesaid
facts noted by the learned trial Court is reflection of
its serious concern about the CICL which is
appreciable, but such observation of the learned
Children’s Court is speculative in nature and would
not be covered by the exception of Sec. 12 of the Act
to refuse bail to the CICL. In view of the aforesaid
facts and circumstances, especially when the grounds
as enumerated in Section-12 of the Act are not
attracted to refuse bail to the CICL-Appellant and the
SIR having not giving any picture that release of the
Appellant would bring him into any known criminal or
expose him into moral, physical and physiological
danger, this Court without expressing any view on
CRLA No.1268 of 2024 Page 5 of 6
merits considers it in the interest of justice to admit
the Appellant to bail.
5. Hence, the Criminal Appeal stands
allowed and the impugned order dated 24.10.2024
passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Children’s
Court, Nayagarh in TR No.132 of 2024 is hereby set
aside. Consequently, the Appellant-Petitioner is
directed to be released on bail on such terms and
conditions as deem fit and proper by the learned
Court in seisin over the matter.
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
Dated the 28th February, 2025/Priyajit
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PRIYAJIT SAHOO
Designation: Jr. Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Date: 03-Mar-2025 19:09:24
CRLA No.1268 of 2024 Page 6 of 6
