Patna High Court
Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The High Court set aside the lower court’s order and granted bail to the juvenile appellant, subject to specified conditions, holding that bail is the rule for juveniles under the JJ Act.
Summary
Manoj Kumar, alleged to have abducted and sexually assaulted a girl and recorded obscene scenes, was detained since December 2024. He filed an application seeking bail, contending that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence and that bail for juveniles is a rule, with denial being exceptional, under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The High Court, after condoning the delay in filing the appeal, examined the provisions of Sections 3(i), (iv), (v), (xiv) and 12 of the JJ Act and noted that the lower court had not considered these provisions. The Court set aside the order of the District Judge dated 14 July 2025 and granted bail to the appellant, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and specific conditions involving his uncle’s undertaking. The bail is conditioned on the appellant’s cooperation with the trial and compliance with the uncle’s affidavit, with default leading to cancellation of bail.
Issues considered
- Whether a person who was a juvenile at the time of committing the alleged offence is entitled to bail under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
- Whether the denial of bail to a juvenile is an exception to the general rule of bail.
- Whether the delay in filing the criminal appeal can be condoned.
- Whether the conditions imposed on bail for a child in conflict with law are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12, 3(i), 3(iv), 3(v), 3(xiv)
Subjects
- Juvenile Justice
- Bail
- Child in Conflict with Law
- Sexual Offence
- Abduction
- Obscene Recording
- Delay Condonation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5229 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-313 Year-2024 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran
======================================================
Manoj Kumar Son of Late Chuman Sahni Resident of Village -Devanibari PS
-Pakridayal District -East Champaran under the guardianship of his uncle
Namely rajababu aged about 21 years, son of Rajendra Sahni Resident of
village- Parkridayal Ward no. 02, ps- Pakaridayal, Dist- East Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X Wife of Y Resident of Mohalla - Pakaridayal, Ward no. 06, Ps-
Pakaridayal, dist- East Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shashank Shekhar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Ramchandra Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Re:- I.A. No. 1 of 2025.
This interlocutory application has been filed on behalf
of the appellant for condonation of delay in filing the instance
criminal appeal which has been found after delay because of
some unavoidable circumstances.
2. For the reasons mentioned in the interlocutory
application, the same is allowed and the delay in filing the
instant criminal appeal is hereby condoned.
Re:- CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5229 of 2025
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned APP for the State.
4. The present application has been filed on behalf of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5229 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
the appellant against the order dated 14.07.2025 passed by the
learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, East
Champaran, Motihari in Children Trial No. 05 of 2025 arising
out of Pakaridayal P.S. Case No. 313 of 2024.
5. As per the prosecution case, the appellant is
accused in a case of abducting the victim girl and committed
sexual activities with her and has also recorded obscene scenes
without her consent.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted
that the appellant has been held to be juvenile and on the date of
occurrence he has been assessed to be less than eighteen years.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant further relies
upon the provisions of the Section 3(i), (iv), (v) and (xiv) of the
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. He
also relies upon Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and has submitted that bail is
a rule and denial of bail to a juvenile is an exception.
8. He further submits that though the appellant is a
child in conflict with law but he has remained in jail since
12.12.2024 and the Court below has not considered the law with
regard to the release of juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5229 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
9. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits
that family members of the appellant including the uncle of the
appellant will take care of the appellant so that he may not do
any further crime and he may not remain in the company of the
criminals.
10. Considering the aforesaid facts, this application is
allowed and the order dated 14.07.2025, is hereby set aside.
11. Let the appellant, above named, be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
ADJ-1st, East Champaran, Motihari/concerned Court below in
connection with Children Trial No. 05 of 2025 arising out of
Pakaridayal P.S. Case No. 313 of 2024, subject to the following
conditions:-
(i) that one of the bailors should be the
uncle of the appellant.
(ii) that the uncle of the appellant shall
file an affidavit before the concerned Court below,
giving specific undertaking that after release of the
appellant on bail, he will take proper care of the
appellant and will not allow him to fall into bad
company.
(iii) The appellant will co-operate in the
trial in the Children Court. He will appear
personally or through his lawyer. Any default in the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5229 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
same will result in the cancellation of the bail
bonds of the appellant.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…