1. This criminal appeal U/S.101(5) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short, “the Act”) is directed against the impugned order dated 01.05.2025 passed in CT(S) Case No.77 of 2022 by which the learned P.O. Children’s Court-cum-Addl. Sessions Judge, Angul has refused to grant bail to the appellant-cum-CICL in connection with Banarpal PS Case No.242 of 2021 arising out of CT(S) Case No.77 of 2022, for commission of offence punishable U/Ss.376(D)/ 302/ 201/ 34 of IPC, on the main allegation of committing Gang Rape and murder of the deceased-victim.
2. In the course of hearing Mr. Anugraha Narayan Samantaray, learned proxy counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. Rajendra Kumar Pradhan, learned counsel for the appellant submits that not only the CICL has been detained in custody beyond four and half years, but also there is no material on record for the further detention of the appellant and all the materials placed on record does not incriminate the appellant in this case. Mr. Samantaray, further submits that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and SIR of the CICL-cum- appellant does not have any adverse report against him and, therefore, the appellant may kindly be granted bail.
2.1 On the other hand, Mr. S.C. Pradhan, learned Addl. PP by relying upon the preliminary assessment report of the CICL submits that not only the CICL-cum-appellant has required physical capacity, but also he has got mental capacity to commit such offence and he(appellant) understands its consequence and therefore, release of the appellant in a case of this nature would be counterproductive and would be not in the interest of justice. Accordingly, Mr. Pradhan prays to dismiss the appeal by rejecting the appeal of the appellant.
3. Bail to the CICL is the rule, but detention in observation home is an exception. According, to Sec.12 of the Act, it is mandated that when any person who is apparently a child shall be released on bail, unless the release of such child is likely to bring into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral physical or psychological danger to his release would defeat the ends of justice. In this case, the appellant is in detention of home since 26.07.2021, but the trial is yet to be concluded, even after four and half years of the detention of the CICL. Continuous detention of CICL has definite adverse impact on his mental faculty, but the aim and objective of the Act is for reformation and correction of the CICL. The paramount consideration in a proceeding for grant of bail to the CICL lies in the proviso to Sec.12 of the Act, wherein, there is stipulation that unless the release of the CICL on bail would likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeats the ends of justice, the CICL shall be released on bail. In order to assess these conditions, this Court false back on the SIR of the CICL, wherein the Legal-cum-Probation Officer, DCPU, Angul in Paragraph-8 has inter alia observed as under:-
“The Child in Conflict with Law Ranjit Nahak got admission in Observation Home, Angul on 26.07.2021 by the order of Juvenile Justice Board, Angul. At the time of his admission into the institution he needs reformation and correction to amend his attitude, conduct and behavior for usable child of the society. Soon after the admission of the CICL in the institution, repeated counseling support has been provided. It is interacted with the superintendent, teacher and other staff of the observation home and nothing adverse is reported against him. They opined that his attitude and behavior has been improving gradually. Being impacted with other co-inmate and under influence of various correctional and reformation activities in the institution, a lot of changes like behavior towards elders, attitudes towards inmates and other positive quality is developed. Subsequently the CICL was shifted to place of safety Rourkela on 13.04.2022. it is also interacted with the Probation Officer and house mother of the Place of Safety, Rourkela. Nothing adverse is reported against the CICL. There is a positive opinion with regards to the conduct and attitude of the CICL. He was actively participated in the various activity of the institution, and secures prizes. Now he appears to be a discipline boy and at the door step of the reformation and correction.
The CICL was a dropout student since 2019, after failed in the HSC Examination. Soon after his admission into the institution, focus has been given for his re-enrolment in the education. It is ensured for appearing HSC Examination. Accordingly, he got admission under State Open School Certificate Examination during the Academic Sessions 2024-25 in SIOS District Center Angul Government High School. He appeared HSC Examination in 2025 and secured Grade-B2 with 60% of Marks. He is under the mainstream, of education and he intends continue his higher education. Hence lenient view may kindly be taken in favor of the CICL in order to restore to the family.”
4. A studied scrutiny of the aforesaid recommendation would go to reveal that no adverse situation or report has come against the CICL, even he was shifted to Place of safety Rourkela on 13.04.2022 and his conduct does not incriminate him. Besides, there is no direct evidence available against the CICL- cum-appellant, but the case is based on circumstantial evidence, however, the trial is yet to be concluded even after such length of time. Long detention would definitely impede the right to speedy trial of the CICL and in this case, the appellant has been detained in custody for a petty long period.
5. In view of the above discussion of facts and taking into consideration the recommendation of the LPO in the SIR and considering the other aspect involved in this case and keeping in view the unfounded right of an CICL to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at the trial/inquiry, this Court without expressing any view on merit considers it proper to admit the appellant to bail.
6. In the result, the Criminal Appeal stands allowed on contest, but in the circumstance there is no order as to costs. Consequently, the appellant be released on bail on such terms and conditions as deems fit and proper by the learned PO, Children’s Court Angul.
