X Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Shashikant Ojha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the State.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this criminal revision petition has been preferred against the judgment dtd. 9/5/2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge I cum Spl. Judge (Children's Court), Gumla, whereby, the Cr. Misc. Appeal No.12/2025 has been dismissed affirming the order dtd. 19/3/2025 passed by the learned J.J. Board, Gumla corresponding to MCA No.405/2025 arising out of Palkot P.S. Case No.11/2025, G.R. Case No.64/2025, registered under Ss. 96 and 70(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Sec. 4/6 of the POCSO Act, whereby, the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected, pending in the Court of the learned J.J. Board, Gumla.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner was aged about 17 years and 11 months at the time of the alleged occurrence. He then submits that the petitioner was taken into custody on 19/2/2025. He next submits that the name of the petitioner has come on the confessional statement of the co-accused. He also submits that the trial has been started and in the trial, the informant and victim have deposed to the effect that nothing has been happened with the victim. To buttress this argument, he produced deposition of the victim and informant, who have been examined as P.W.1 and P.W.2 respectively. The said depositions have been taken on record. He further submits that the petitioner is being represented through his mother and the mother is ready to give undertaking that she will take care of the child and he will not be exposed to any moral, physical or psychological danger. He then submits that the learned J.J. Board, Gumla has been pleased to reject the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that there is every likelihood that he may be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger and he may come in association with the known criminal. He also submits that the learned appellate court has also dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner on the same premises. On these grounds, he submits that the bail may kindly be granted to the petitioner.