Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Dileep vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:9610) on 23 February, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:9610]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 274/2026
Dileep S/o Hanumanram Jat, Aged About 17 Years, Resident Of
Jasnagar, Police Station Jasnagar, Through His Natural
Guardianfather Hanumanram, Son Of Deenaram, Resident Of
Jato Ka Baas, Jasnagar, Tehsil Riyabadi, District Nagaur.
(Presently Kept At Observation Home Juvenile Justice Board,
Nagaur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Singh Bhati
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA
Mr. JK Suthar
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
23/02/2026
1. The juvenile ‘D’ son of Shri Hanumanram Jat has been confined in
connection with FIR No.02/2026 registered at Police Station
Kuchera, District Nagaur and for the offences under Sections
115(2), 127(2), 308(2), 303(2), 318(4) and 61(2)(a) of the BNS.
He is lodged at the Child Observation Home, Nagaur. The bail
application preferred under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act,
2015 by the juvenile through amicus curiae was dismissed by the
learned Juvenile Justice Board, Nagaur vide order dated
02.02.2026. An appeal was preferred under Section 101 of the
Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 against the said order before the
learned Session Judge, Merta which also came to be dismissed
vide order dated 07.02.2026 and the order passed by the learned
(Uploaded on 24/02/2026 at 02:58:32 PM)
(Downloaded on 24/02/2026 at 08:49:42 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9610] (2 of 4) [CRLR-274/2026]
Board was upheld. Aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, the
present revision petition has been filed under Section 102 of the
Juvenile Justice Act read with Section 397/401 of the Cr.P.C.
2. Learned counsel for the juvenile-petitioner submits that the
Juvenile Justice Board as well as the learned court below has
grossly erred in rejecting the bail application of the juvenile-
petitioner. They have failed to consider the correct factual
and legal aspects of the case. The juvenile has been
detained at the Child Observation Home, Nagaur since quite
some time and looking at the pace at which the trial is
proceeding, it will likely take long time to conclude. The
Juvenile Justice Board has treated the accused as juvenile.
He further submits that there is no possibility of the juvenile-
petitioner absconding. There is nothing on record that may
debar him from getting released on bail, therefore, it is
humbly prayed that the impugned orders be set aside and
the juvenile be released on bail.
3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the
complainant vehemently opposes the prayer made by
learned counsel for the juvenile-petitioner and submits that
since the matter pertains to commission of a grave offence,
the petitioner is not deserving of being released on bail.
4. Heard.
5. From the perusal of Section 12(1) of the Act of 2015, it is
established legal position that a delinquent juvenile
ordinarily has to be released on bail irrespective of nature of
offence alleged to have been committed by him unless it is
shown by evidence that if he is released on bail, there
(Uploaded on 24/02/2026 at 02:58:32 PM)
(Downloaded on 24/02/2026 at 08:49:42 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9610] (3 of 4) [CRLR-274/2026]
appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release of
the delinquent juvenile is likely to bring him into association
with any known criminals or expose him to moral, physical
or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the
ends of justice. The nature of offence and the merits of the
case do not have any relevance. It is for the prosecution to
bring on record such material while opposing the bail and
make out any of the grounds provided in the section, which
may persuade the court not to release the juvenile on bail.
But in this case, there is nothing on record to show that the
release of the juvenile-petitioner is likely to bring him into
association with any known criminal or expose him to moral,
physical or psychological danger or that his release would
defeat the ends of justice.
6. Upon consideration of the overall facts and circumstances,
and considering the fact of juvenescence of the petitioner,
this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner deserves to be
released on bail. His entitlement to bail is further supported
as the conditions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act are
duly satisfied.
7. The observations made herein above shall not influence the
trial judge in any manner whatsoever so as to adversely
affect the rights of either of the parties.
8. Consequently, the instant revision is allowed. The impugned
order dated 02.02.2026 passed by the learned Juvenile
Justice Board, Nagaur and the impugned order dated
07.02.2026 passed by the Session Judge, Merta are set
aside. It is ordered that the accused-petitioner ‘D’ S/o
(Uploaded on 24/02/2026 at 02:58:32 PM)
(Downloaded on 24/02/2026 at 08:49:42 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:9610] (4 of 4) [CRLR-274/2026]
Hanumanram arrested in connection with FIR No.02/2026
registered at Police Station Kuchera, District Nagaur shall be
released on bail; provided his natural guardian furnishes a
personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two surety bonds of
Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned court
below with the stipulation that he will make his son appear
before the Board on all dates of hearing and as and when
called upon to do so and he will ensure that any situation
which may bring the juvenile-petitioner into association with
any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or
psychological danger or any situation where the juvenile-
petitioner may repeat the offence in question is thwarted
and he will work for improvement of the juvenile-petitioner.
(FARJAND ALI),J
67-Samvedana/-
(Uploaded on 24/02/2026 at 02:58:32 PM)
(Downloaded on 24/02/2026 at 08:49:42 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
