Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. Being aggrieved by the said order, the applicant preferred Criminal Appeal No. H11/2026 under Section 101 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 before the learned Children Court/Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, Mahasamund. The said appeal has also been dismissed vide impugned order dated 12.02.2026. Hence, the present criminal revision.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the learned Courts below have failed to appreciate the true scope and mandate of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which provides that a child in conflict with law shall ordinarily be released on bail unless the case falls within the three exceptional circumstances contemplated therein. It is submitted that none of the said exceptions are attracted in the present case, yet the courts below have erroneously rejected the bail application merely on the ground that the release of the juvenile would defeat the ends of justice. It is further contended that no contraband has been recovered from the conscious possession of the present applicant and he was merely accompanying the co-accused as a household servant. He further submits that several procedural irregularities have been committed by the prosecution during search and seizure, including preparation of a joint seizure memo, non- mention of certified weights and measures in the Panchnama, delay of about 12 days in producing the seized contraband before the Magistrate in violation of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act, and absence of proper certification and hash value in the electronic evidence under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, as well as non-compliance of the mandatory provisions under Section 105 of the BNSS. It is also submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and only one mobile phone belonging to him has been seized by the police. The mother of the applicant, who is the deponent in the supporting affidavit, has undertaken to ensure that the applicant continues his studies and does not associate with persons of criminal background if released on bail. It is further submitted that the trial is likely to take considerable time and continued detention of the juvenile would be unjustified, particularly when in a similar matter a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRR No. 622/2022 granted bail to a juvenile accused even in a case involving transportation of 148 kg of ganja. Therefore, it is prayed that the impugned orders be set aside and the applicant be enlarged on bail in the interest of justice.