Chattisgarh High Court
Juvenile In Conflict With Law vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 June, 2025
Author: Narendra Kumar Vyas
Bench: Narendra Kumar Vyas
1
2025:CGHC:26013
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRR No. 646 of 2025
Juvenile In Conflict With Law Nil ... Applicants
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Police Station Dharsiwa, Raipur, Distt. Raipur
Chhattisgarh
... Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Neeraj Sharma Dy. Advocate General
Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Order on Board
20/06/2025
1. This revision petition under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short ‘the Act of 2015’) is filed
against the order dated 07.04.2025 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, (FTC) Raipur (CG) in Criminal Appeal No. 106/2025
filed against the order dated 17.02.2025 passed by the Principal
Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mana Camp (for short ‘the Board’) by
which application for grant of bail to applicants in connection with Crime
No. 615/2023 decided on 07.04.2025 registered at Police Station
Dharsiva, District Raipur for the offences under Sections 147,148,
SANTOSH
KUMAR
SHARMA
Digitally signed by
SANTOSH KUMAR
SHARMA
Date: 2025.06.23
10:30:27 +0530
2
149,325,307 of the Indian Penal Code, 25 & 27 of the Arms Act and 3(2)
(v) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Act.
2. Prosecution case in brief is that complainant Murli Manohar Markam
lodged the complaint before Police Station Dharsiva alleging that
accused Puran Solanki, Dinesh Solanki, Amit Solanki and Vijay Rathore
have assaulted his son when his son Kripesh Markam had taken his dog
outside from his house near Sarswati Shishu Mandir Taresar Road, at
the same time, the applicant along with other co-accused have reached
there armed with rod, lathi and danda and assaulted the son of
complainant on account of old enmity. Upon receiving the information on
mobile, he alongwith his brother reached to the spot where they saw that
the applicants and co-accused with common intention surrounded his
son threatened to kill him and started assaulting him with lathi, danda,
knife and rod, as a result of which, he sustained injuries on his eyes, leg
and the rib. On the basis of complaint, FIR was lodged before Police
Station Dharsiva under Crime No. 615 of 2025. The police after usual
investigation has filed the challan before the competent Court. Since the
applicants are juvenile, therefore, charge sheet submitted before
Juvenile Justice Board, Raipur.
3. Learned Juvenile Justice Board has rejected the same vide order dated
17.02.2025. Being aggrieved with the order of the Board, the applicants
have preferred an appeal under Section 101 of Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short ‘the Act of 2015’), the
same has been dismissed on 07.04.2025 in Cr.A No. 106 of 2025. Both
3
the orders has been assailed before this Court by filing the instant
Criminal Revision.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants
have been falsely implicated in this case. They have not committed any
offence as alleged. He would further submit that the applicants are in jail
since 28.12.2023 and the trial has not begun and only one witness has
been examined and his cross-examination is still not completed. He
would further submit that no specific allegation has been levelled against
them and status report submitted by the Presiding Officer has also
recommended for keeping the child in home, so that he may return to the
society and would pray for allowing the revision.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposing the
submissions of learned counsel for applicant, would submit that there is
direct allegation against the applicants as alleged by the complainant
and his son and the manner in which they have assaulted the victims. He
further submits that release of applicants is likely to expose him to moral
or psychological danger and as such, their bail application has rightly
been rejected by the Board and as well as by the Appellate Court and
would pray for rejection of the same.
6. I have heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the
documents filed along with criminal revision.
7. First submission made by counsel for the applicants is that the trial is
not regularly conducting by the Board. This court has received social
status report on 12.06.2025 wherein it is mentioned that Presiding Officer
was transferred on 19.12.2024 to 09.03.2025 and on 25.03.2025 to
4
26.04.2025, now the Principal Magistrate, has been appointed and there
is no impediment to conclude the trial expeditiously. Thus the submission
made by counsel for the applicants on the ground of delay cannot be
considered.
8. Further submission of the counsel for the applicants is that nothing has
been brought against the applicants whereas one witness was examined
before the Court whose cross examination is still not completed. From
bare perusal of FIR it is clear, one person was assaulted by so many
person with rod, lathi and danda, further considering the manner in which
the applicants have assaulted the victim with rod, lathi, danda and knife
and also looking to the gravity of the offence, I am of the view that
releasing the applicant will not be in his interest and I do not find any
error in the order passed by the Appellate Court as well as by the Board.
Accordingly, the revision is dismissed.
9. However, it is directed that the Juvenile Justice Board should make an
endeavor to conclude the trial as early as possible. It is also directed that
unnecessary adjournment will not be granted to any of the parties by the
Juvenile Justice Board.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Santosh