SK. IBRAHIM Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision U/S. 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short "the Act") is directed against the impugned order dtd. 21/6/2025 passed by the learned Presiding Officer Children's Court, Mayurbhanj, Baripada in BA No. 10 of 2025 confirming the order passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Mayurbhan, Baripada in JC Case No. 44 of 2025 arising out of Udala PS Case No. 210 of 2025 refusing to grant bail to the revision-petitioner who are child in conflict with law(CICLs) for commission of offence punishable U/Ss. 296/351(2)/3(5) of BNS read with Sec. 6 of POCSO Act on the main allegation of committing penetrative sexual assault upon the victim boy aged about 9 years.

(2.) Heard, Mr.Anjan Kumar Biswal, learned counsel for the revision-petitioner and Mr.R.B.Mishra, learned Addl. PP and perused the record including the Social Investigation Report of the child in conflict with law-cum-petitioners as produced by the Addl. PP.

(3.) No doubt the learned Presiding Officer Children's Court, Mayurbhanj, Baripada has refused to grant bail to the CICLs-cum-revision petitioners, but Sec. 12 of the Act mandates that release of the CICL is the rule, but proviso appended thereto, creates exception for detention of CICL in Observation Home. It is, therefore, very clear that the CICL shall be released on bail, unless there appears reasonable grounds for believing that release of the CICL would bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice. In this case, the Social Investigation Report(SIR) of the CICLs as produced by the learned Addl. PP reveals that the CICIs are first time offender and they have committed the alleged offence being unaware of the consequence and the CICLs are regretting for committing the offences and they are mentally disturbed. It is also stated in the SIR that the CICLs belong to lower middle class family and sociable. In the aforesaid circumstance and after having considered the rival submissions, since the bail application of the revision-petitioners has to be considered in the light of the factors as prescribed in Sec. 12 of the Act, this Court feels that release of the revision-petitioners may be in the interest of justice, more particularly when they are aged about 14 & 15 years.