@ @ Sinam Bengh =—,>- myuvn :vvngv an m 1 uh ’iihri LUIJRT 6F 3Uj'}n,A1 "uiw, A1 §1LA3FUK {(‘ GA €REF¥EENAL REVHSKEJ N02ézi 1’ 2905 State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S Railway Police, Raipur District— Raipur (CG) Mg, r < REVISION APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 53 OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT 1986. NON-APPLICANT: APPLECANT: ’ Jyotii'aj @ Takuna, (IN JAIL) S/o Kastantino Naik, Aged about 15 years, ‘ R/o Village Padampur, 39.74.,“ District— Raigarha, Orrisa “blown“ Present Adress a f Village Auanpur, § a; ; JK '. £5 ‘ C District— Gajpati, OITisa (Va/w Through his brother Sukanto 4 Lima S/o S/o Kastantino Naik, Aged about 26 years, ,. *g’N A) \é, Cgé‘l/ ‘a . a § ’ 1% B“:Mum R/o Village Padampur, District— Raigarha, Orrisa $44078 11111351 mm'as i (e...f\.l9..?é‘1] 3mmW Rafa—513;) ,7 WQI air wit? ammaWW maqggama WWW‘IEI‘WW .. _ , - ‘ W‘sWanésT 01/07/2005 Shri O,P.Sahu, counsel for the applicant. Shri D.K.Gwa!re. P.L. for the: State. Heard. This revision under Section 53‘ 'of the Juvenile Justice Act 2000, has been preferred by Jljvenile Applicant namely, Jyotiraj @ Takuna who has been arrést‘ed in connection with Crime No.38l2005 registered in Police Station Railway Police, Raipur for the offs nce punishable under Section 20 (B) of the NDPS Act. His application for grant of bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justicé Act was‘rejected by thEs‘Juvenile Justice Board against which the applicant preferred‘an appeal un Section 52 of the Act and which was also rejected by the impugned order b the learned Sessions Judge, Raipur on the ground that in case the delinqu nt child is released on bail he may again associate in the trade of narcoti s which shall adversely affect the juvenile. delinquent morally, physically and ‘ ychologically which is against the interest of the Juvenile delinquent ‘ The facts of the case is th 7 lgs of cannabis were recovered from the. possession of the present appllca by the police on 05/03/2005 and on the basrs of the recovery, the aforesaid cri e was registered against him. Charge sheet has been tiled and the applicant is facing triai under Section 20 (B) of the NDPS Act. Under the Juvenile Justice A the application for grant of bail was filed by the applicant which was rejected nd presently he is detained in the remand home meant for juveniles. The ap al preferred before learned Sessions Judge, Raipur which was also rejected vid impugned order dated 24/05/2005. Leamed counsel for the ap iicant submits that the Courts below ought to have released the applicant on b il as per Section 12 of the Act as he is in custody since last four months an there was no material on record to show that after release the applicant may co e in association with the persons involved in . avgt—an:&-— d r c,