Cr.Rev./1100/2026 of PRINCE LOHAR REPSENTED THROUGH HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER NAMELY RITU LOIHAR Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 1 October 2026

--1--

Criminal Revision No. 1100 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

Prince Lohar, aged about 15 years, S/o Late Taklu Lohar, R/o Hume Pipe Chhaya Nagar, near Civil Court, PO and PS – Sitaramdera, Town – Jamshedpur, District – East Singhbhum, Jharkhand, represented through his natural guardian and mother namely Ritu Lohar, w/o Late Taklu Lohar, R/o Hume Pipe Chhaya Nagar, near Civil Court, PO and PS – Sitaramdera, Town – Jamshedpur, District – East Singhbhum, Jharkhand

.... Petitioner

-- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand

.... Opposite Party

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

For the Petitioner :- Ms. Supriya Dayal, Advocate

:- Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate

For the State

:- Mrs. Malsi Pathak, Advocate

---- 02/01.10.2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.

2. This criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 01.08.2026 passed in Criminal Appeal No.169 of 2026 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children’s Court), Jamshedpur arising out of the order dated 23.05.2026 passed in MCA No.3069 of 2026 and Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.35 of 2026 in which learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur has been pleased to reject the bail prayer of the

--2--

Criminal Revision No. 1100 of 2026 petitioner which has been affirmed by the learned appellate court.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was aged about 14 years 3 months and 9 days at the time of alleged occurrence and the petitioner has been declared juvenile by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur. She further submits that no incriminating articles have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. She then submits that as per the allegation the informant merely claims to have seen the petitioner while the informant was fleeing from the spot and apart from that there is no allegation against the petitioner. She next submits that house of the petitioner is near the place of occurrence. She also submits that the petitioner is in remand home since 11.04.2026. She next submits that both the learned Courts have been pleased to reject the bail of the petitioner only on the ground that the petitioner will be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer and submits that the petitioner was seen near the place of occurrence and in view of that learned Courts have rightly passed the order, as such the criminal revision petition may kindly be dismissed.

5. In the FIR, it is alleged that the petitioner was seen near the place of occurrence and the informant has only alleged that he

--3--

Criminal Revision No. 1100 of 2026 has seen the petitioner near the place of occurrence. It has been pointed out that the petitioner resides near the place of occurrence and he has got no criminal antecedent and he is in remand home since 11.04.2026 and further the petitioner is being represented by mother. Both the learned Courts have been pleased to reject the bail application of the petitioner only on the ground that there is every chance that the petitioner will expose to known criminal.

6. In light of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, juvenile can be denied bail only on the following three grounds :

(i) if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal, or

(ii) expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger, or

(iii) the person’s release would defeat the ends of justice.

7. In absence of any materials or evidences of reasonable grounds, it cannot be said that release of the petitioner would defeat the ends of justice and the learned Courts have failed to give reasons on three contingencies for declining the bail to the revisionist and in view of that the order dated 01.08.2026 passed in Criminal Appeal No.169 of 2026 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children’s Court), Jamshedpur arising out of the order dated 23.05.2026 passed in MCA No.3069 of 2026 and Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.35 of 2026 are hereby set aside and

--4--

Criminal Revision No. 1100 of 2026 the present criminal revision is allowed.

8. Let the revisionist who is in observation home since 11.04.2026 be released on bail via assurance and surety given by his natural guardian/mother, in connection with Sitaramdera P.S. Case No.35 of 2026 for the offence under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 126(2), 127(2), 109 and 61(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of Arms Act and Section 103(1) of BNS was further added vide order dated 09.06.2026 by learned Judicial Magistrate after furnishing a personal bond on his mother (Ritu Lohar) with two sureties of her relatives each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur, subject to the following conditions:

(i) Natural guardian/mother will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionist will not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical, or psychological danger and further that the mother will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

(ii) Natural guardian/mother will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level which he would be encouraged to do besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits.

(iii) Juvenile and natural guardian/mother will report to the Probation Officer on the second Monday of every calendar month commencing with the second Monday of October,

--5--

Criminal Revision No. 1100 of 2026 2026, and if during any calendar month the second Monday falls on a holiday, then on the following working day.

(iv) The Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the learned Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Jamshedpur, on such a periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.

9. This criminal revision petition is allowed and disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated 01.10.2026 Sangam/