Anand Kumar DasversusThe State of Bihar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       CRIMINAL REVISION No.1130 of 2025
       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2025 Thana- Sahayak Khajanchi District- Purnia
     ======================================================
     Anand Kumar Das S/O Umesh Das R/O Near Shiv Mandir Bhatta Bazar,
     Tatma Toli, P.S- Sahayak, K.Hat, Distt.- Purnea.

                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                            Versus
1.   The State of Bihar
2.   Raj Kumar Das S/O Sri Sudhanshu Chanda Das R/O Moulvi Bari, Rajni
     Chowk, Ward No. 25, Purnea, P.S- Sahayak, K.Hat, Purnea, Distt.- Purnea,
     Permanent Address- Gukul Singh Thakurbari Rajni Chowk, Ward No. 25,
     P.S- Sahayak (Khajandhi), Purnea, Dist.- Purnea.

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Bijendra Kumar Singh
     For the Respondent/s     :        Mr.Abhay Kumar
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
     ORAL JUDGMENT
      Date : 11-06-2026

                 Heard the parties.

                 2. The present application is being preferred against

      the order dated 24.09.2025 passed by learned District and

      Addl. Sessions Judge 1st- cum- Spl. Judge Children Court,

      Purnea, in connection with Sahayak Khajanchi P.S. Case No.

      163 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections

      137(2), 96, 3(5), 70(2) of BNS and Section 6/10 of POCSO

      by which the learned Court has refused to enlarge the

      petitioner on bail.

                 3. The Child in conflict with law (for short
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1130 of 2025 dt.11-06-2026
                                            2/6




         ‘CICL’)/petitioner, aged about 16 years 8 month on the

         alleged date of occurrence, is named in F.I.R. and is in

         observation home since 24.05.2025.

                     4. As per FIR, CICL/petitioner alleged to kidnap the

         minor daughter of the informant alongwith other co-accused

         persons. It is also alleged that prior to the occurrence the

         informant who is the mother of the victim was threatened by

         the CICL/petitioner and his father.

                     5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

         CICL/petitioner submitted that allegation qua sexual assault

         is not available against CICL/petitioner. It is submitted that

         there is major contradiction between the statement of victim

         recorded under Section 180 and 183 of BNSS. It is pointed

         out that the allegation of kidnapping is available against co-

         accused Subham Kumar as per statement of victim recorded

         under section 180 of BNSS where she also stated that

         Mazza (soft drinks) was offered by co-accused Subham

         Kumar. It is also pointed out that the allegation of sexual

         assault not appears available against this CICL/petitioner as

         victim categorically stated while recording her statement
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1130 of 2025 dt.11-06-2026
                                            3/6




         under Section 180 of BNSS, that her body was touched by

         co-accused Subham Kumar and Sushant Kumar. It is pointed

         out that she came to know about penetrative sexual assault

         was committed upon her by all three person including

         petitioner/CICL, out of their conversions only.

                     6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

         CICL/petitioner submitted that no injury was found upon

         victim in support of the allegation. It is pointed out that

         doctor opined her age between 15-17 years and in fact she

         was in love with one of the co-accused namely Subham

         Kumar. It is submitted that this petitioner was implicated

         with this case being friend of co-accused Subham Kumar and

         Sushant Kumar.

                     7. Arguing further, it is pointed out that the Social

         Investigation Report, no where reveals that CICL may not

         improve him in future as to join the main stream of civilized

         society, therefore, there is no harm to release the juvenile

         under the supervision and care of his father, who is ready to

         extend his care and love to the petitioner.

                     8. Learned APP opposed the prayer for bail.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1130 of 2025 dt.11-06-2026
                                            4/6




                     9. Having regard to the submissions and materials

         showing that the CICL/petitioner has been adjudged juvenile

         aged about 16 years 8 month on the alleged date of

         occurrence, and also as CICL/petitioner has remained in the

         Observation Home since 24.05.2025 and his father is ready

         to stand as a surety and furnish an undertaking that if

         released on bail he will take care of the CICL/petitioner and

         shall ensure that he does not fall in bad company and, in

         case, the petitioner indulges in any unlawful act, he will

         inform it to the jurisdictional police station as also following

         the spirit of section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and

         Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and in view of the

         exceptions carved out by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this

         Court in the case of Lalu Kumar and Ors. Vs. The State

         of Bihar reported in 2019 (4) PLJR 833 that classification

         of the offences under the bailable and non-bailable sections

         would not be relevant for the purpose of grant of bail to a

         juvenile and the prayer for bail of a juvenile may be rejected

         only under one of the three conditions, which are as under:-

                            “(i) The release is likely to bring that person into
                            association with any known criminal;
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1130 of 2025 dt.11-06-2026
                                            5/6




                            (ii) The release is likely to expose the said person
                            to moral or physiological danger; and
                            (iii) The release would defeat the ends of justice.”
                     10. Having regard to the submissions made by the

         parties and taking into consideration the materials on record

         as well as the period of incarceration of the petitioner/CICL

         and in the best interest of CICL, this Court is of the

         considered view that the impugned order passed by the court

         below is not in consonance with the aims and objectives of

         the Act. Even social investigation report suggest scope of

         reform and nothing adverse was noticed against him.

                      11.      In    view      of    the    aforesaid   facts   and

          circumstances, as petitioner/CICL was found 16 years 8

          month on the date of occurrence, coupled with the fact that

          charge-sheet has already been submitted, where Social

          Investigation         Report       (SIR)        nowhere   suggest     that

          CICL/petitioner cannot be reformed in future as to join the

          main stream of society, accordingly, the order dated

          24.09.2025 passed by learned District and Addl. Sessions

          Judge 1st- cum- Spl. Judge Children Court, Purnea, in

          connection with Sahayak Khajanchi P.S. Case No. 163 of
             Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1130 of 2025 dt.11-06-2026
                                                         6/6




                       2025 is hereby set aside.

                                   12.The criminal revision application stands allowed.

                                   13. Let the CICL-petitioner, named-above, be

                       released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-

                       (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with two sureties of

                       the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District

                       and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st- cum- Spl. Judge Children

                       Court, Purnea, in connection with Sahayak Khajanchi P.S.

                       Case No. 163 of 2025 on the following conditions:-

                                         (i) That one of the sureties should be the
                                         father of the CICL/petitioner; and
                                         (ii) That the father of the CICL/petitioner shall
                                         file an affidavit before the learned Juvenile
                                         Justice Board, Patna, giving specific
                                         undertaking that after release of the
                                         CICL/petitioner on bail, he will take proper
                                         care of the petitioner and will not allow him to
                                         fall into bad company.



                                                                  (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

Sudha/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          11.06.2026
Transmission Date       11.06.2026