Patna High Court
Arvind KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding no sufficient ground to deny liberty at the stage of prosecution evidence.
Summary
Arvind Kumar was arrested on charges under Section 79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and Sections 3 and 14 of the Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 for allegedly trafficking children to Vijayawada for work on a construction project. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, was moving the children for labor, while the petitioner contended that the allegations were false, stating he was merely a student helping the children’s parents and that the children themselves testified that no allurement was involved. The petitioner had no prior criminal record and had been in custody since September 9, 2025, with charges framed on December 18, 2025, and the case at the prosecution‑evidence stage. The State opposed bail, but the court, considering the lack of a complaint from the children’s parents, the nature of the alleged conduct, and the pending stage of the trial, ordered the release of the petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties. The bail bond is to be furnished before the Additional District and Sessions Judge where the case is pending.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite charges under Section 79 of the Juvenile Justice Act and the Child Labour Act.
- Whether the allegations of child trafficking are substantiated or false.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- child trafficking
- juvenile justice
- child labour
- human trafficking
- criminal procedure
- Section 79
- Section 3
- Section 14
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80000 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR RAIL P.S. District-
Saran
======================================================
Arvind Kumar S/o Rampukar Mahto RO village- Thatiya Belordih, Ward No
1, PS- Kudhani, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sonu Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
4 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered forthe
offence punishable under Section 79 of J.J. Act and u/s 3 and 14
of the Child Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation)
Act, 1986.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant along
with other police officials on getting confidential information
about human trafficking reached Muzaffarpur Platform and
found some feared children seated in the train. On enquiring
they disclose that accused persons including petitioner were
taking the children to Vijaywada for work of an under
construction over bridge.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80000 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
allegation of trafficking of children made under section 143 (5)
of BNS for the purposes of getting labour work done from them
is absolutely false and concocted and as a matter of fact the
petitioner himself is a student and he was going to his father
when the parents of the adolescent victim had asked him to take
them along with him to his father’s place for the purposes of
some employment opportunities for them. It is also pointed out
that the children were aged about 15-16 years for whom even
according to Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and
Regulation) Act, 1986 employment at Hazardous places is only
prohibited and not that any other employment is prohibited. In
any view of the matter, the petitioner was only trying to help the
parents of these children and this fact has been supported by the
statement of the children recorded during course of investigation
in paragraph nos. 72 to 77 where they have clearly stated that no
allurement was provided by the petitioner in this regard. Further
the petitioner, having no criminal antecedent, is in custody
since 09.09.2025 and the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the
State indicates that the charges have already been framed on
18.12.2025 and the case is now at the stage of prosecution
evidence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80000 of 2025(4) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the grant of
bail.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and considering the fact that the petitioner was
only taking the children along with him to his father’s house and
there is no complaint during course of investigation by parents
of such children and further charges have already been framed,
let the above named petitioner, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
/concerned Court below in connection with Muzaffarpur G.R.
P.S. Case No. 193 of 2025/concerned court below.
7. It is pointed out that the case is now pending before
the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-17,
Muzaffarpur and as such the bail bonds shall be furnished at the
place where the case is presently pending.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…