Patna High Court

Ratan Kumar @ Rishav KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 23 June 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ARUN KUMAR JHA

Holding

The appellate court's order dismissing bail and the Juvenile Justice Board's order are set aside, and bail is granted to the child in conflict with law.

Summary

The petitioner, a child in conflict with law (CICL) aged fourteen years, was implicated in a murder case under the B.N.S. Act, 2023 and the Arms Act. The Juvenile Justice Board and the appellate court denied his bail, citing concerns of re‑association with criminal elements and the child's welfare. In the revision petition, the High Court examined Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which mandates bail for a CICL unless there are reasonable grounds to believe release would endanger the child or defeat the ends of justice. The Court found no material evidence to support the lower courts' apprehensions and held that the denial of bail was not sustainable. Consequently, the appellate and JJB orders were set aside, and the petitioner was released on bail with conditions, and the revision petition was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether bail must be granted to a child in conflict with law under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act when no material shows risk of re‑association with criminals or danger.
Whether the Juvenile Justice Board and the appellate court erred in refusing bail to the petitioner.
Whether the disclosure of the CICL's identity in the cause title violates Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12, 3(iv), 74

Subjects

bail
child in conflict with law
Juvenile Justice Act
protective custody
identity disclosure
revision petition
B.N.S. Act
Arms Act

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.1240 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-706 Year-2024 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna
======================================================
X1
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Animesh Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ravish Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 23-06-2026

Present learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

learned APP for the State.

2. From perusal of record, it transpires that in the

revision petition, the identity details of the petitioner / child in

conflict with law (for brevity, “CICL”) is being disclosed, which is

against the statutory provisions prescribed under Section 74 of the

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015,

which mandates protection of disclosure of identity of the CICL.

Therefore, the identity of the CICL is being referred to in the cause

title as X1.

3. Registry while uploading the order on the website

shall also ensure that the cause title is reflected in similar manner.

4. The instant criminal revision petition is directed

against the order dated 24.09.2025 passed by the learned District
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1240 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
2/8

and Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Children

Court (Juvenile Court), Patna in Criminal Appeal No. 81 of 2025,

whereby and whereunder the appeal was dismissed and the order

of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Patna dated 16.07.2025 passed

in J.J.B. Case No. 645 of 2025, arising out of Dhanarua P.S. Case

No. 706 of 2024, having G.R. No. 2187 of 2024 registered for the

offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61, 238 and 3(5) of the

B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act has been affirmed.

5. As per prosecution case, Dhanarua P.S. Case No.

706 of 2024 was registered under Sections 103(1), 61, 238 and

3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act on the

basis of written report of one Shashiranjan Kumar, ASI. In the

written report, informant has submitted that dead body of an

unknown person was found who was shot dead. Subsequently the

deceased was identified and the name of the petitioner and other

co-accused persons transpired for being involved in the murder of

the deceased. The petitioner was arrested on 09.06.2025 and vide

order dated 16.07.2025 the petitioner was declared a child in

conflict with law, assessing his age to be fourteen years, four

months and twenty-eight days on the date of occurrence.

Thereafter the petitioner / CICL moved before the learned J.J.

Board seeking bail and the learned J.J. Board in J.J.B. Case No.

645 of 2025 vide its order dated 16.07.2025 rejected the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1240 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
3/8

prayer of petitioner / CICL. Being aggrieved by the rejection order

of the learned J.J. Board, the petitioner / CICL approached the

Court of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-

Special Judge, Children Court (Juvenile Court), Patna, in Criminal

Appeal No. 81 of 2025 challenging the order of the learned J.J.

Board. However, the appeal of the petitioner / CICL was dismissed

by the learned Appellate Court on 24.09.2025. Against this order

of dismissal, the petitioner / CICL has approached this Court in the

instant revision petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner / CICL submits

that the petitioner / CICL has been falsely implicated in this case

and he is innocent. The petitioner / CICL has been named in this

case merely on the basis of suspicion and no material has come up

against the petitioner / CICL showing his involvement or

complicity in the offence as alleged. The petitioner / CICL has

been named by the co-accused Rajiv Mahto in his confessional

statement and the said co-accused has been granted bail by a

learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

16.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34207 of 2025. Learned

counsel further submits that the learned Appellate Court rejected

the prayer for bail of the petitioner / CICL relying mainly on the

SIR, which was also relied upon by the learned J.J. Board at the

time of rejection of prayer for bail of the petitioner / CICL. But
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1240 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
4/8

there is no material on record to show that there was any chance

for petitioner / CICL in again getting involved in such offence

which would expose him to moral, physical and psychological

danger or the ends of justice would be defeated. Learned counsel

further submits that both the Courts below while rejecting the

prayer for bail have recorded that in the best interest of CICL, it

would not be proper to allow the prayer for bail of the petitioner /

CICL and he should be kept in protective custody. He further

submits that the father of the petitioner / CICL is no more, but the

mother is there to look after the petitioner / CICL and view of the

learned Court below that mother was not in a position to take the

proper care for the petitioner / CICL is without any substance. He

further submits that impugned order dated 24.10.2025 is not

sustainable either in fact or otherwise. Learned counsel also

submits that though the petitioner / CICL is having antecedent of

two cases, but the cases are not of similar nature and existence of

criminal antecedents should not come in the way of release of the

petitioner / CICL as everybody should get a chance to reform

himself.

7. Learned APP for the State opposes the submissions

made on behalf of the petitioner / CICL and submits that the

petitioner / CICL is accused in two cases and while on bail he

committed the offence as alleged and there is every likelihood of
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1240 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
5/8

petitioner / CICL again getting involved in such type of occurrence

considering his past conduct.

8. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the

rival submissions advanced by the parties and perused the record.

9. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and

Protection of Children) Act, 2015 provides as under:

“Section 12 – Bail to a person who is
apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law.

1) When any person, who is apparently a child
and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-
bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the
police or appears or brought before a Board, such
person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in
any other law for the time being in force, be released
on bail with or without surety or placed under the
supervision of a probation officer or under the care of
any fit person:

Provided that such person shall not be so
released if there appears reasonable grounds for
believing that the release is likely to bring that person
into association with any known criminal or expose the
said person to moral, physical or psychological danger
or the persons release wold defeat the ends of justice,
and the Board shall record the reason for denying the
bail and circumstances that led to such a decision.

2) When such person having been apprehended
is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the
officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer
shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation
home [or a place of safety, as the case may be] in such
manner as may be prescribed until the person can be
brought before a Board.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1240 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
6/8

3) When such person is not released on bail
under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an
order sending him to an observation home or a place
of safety, as the case may be, for such period during
the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as
may be specified in the order.

4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to
fulfill the conditions of bail order within seven days of
the order, such child shall be produced before the
Board for modification of the conditions of bail.”

10. The aforesaid provision mandates grant of bail to

a CICL, except when there is apprehension that such a release

would allow him to come in contact with known criminal elements

or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or the

release would defeat the ends of justice. Therefore, the provision

of law for grant of bail is mandatory, subject to certain exceptions.

11. However, at the same time, Section 3(iv) provides

that the welfare of the child is of paramount importance and the

endeavour of the Court should be reformation of child. In the

present case, it appears the learned Appellate Court as well as

learned J.J. Board has not appreciated the SIR in its true

perspective. There is material to show that there was complete

failure of guardianship and the CICL could not be released under

the supervision of such guardian as it would defeat the ends of

justice. If there is no material to substantiate this presumption, the

order dismissing the appeal and thus, refusing to grant bail to the

CICL could not be sustained.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1240 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
7/8

12. Though the petitioner is said to have antecedents

of two cases, but it should always be the endeavour of the Court to

allow the a CICL to have a brush with reformation as

institutionalization should be the last resort. So far as the social

investigation report of the petitioner / CICL is concerned, nothing

has been brought on record to show that the release of the

petitioner / CICL would result in the petitioner / CICL again

coming in contact with criminal elements of the society or that he

would be exposed to physical and psychological danger or that the

ends of justice be defeated and society will get a wrong message.

For making such observation, there must be some concrete

material on record because the intention of the law is not to

penalise the CICL, but to reform him and bring him in society as

responsible citizen. Therefore, considering the facts and

circumstances in totality, I am of the view that the impugned order

could not be sustained.

13. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Court

dated 24.09.2025 passed by the learned District and Additional

Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Children Court (Juvenile

Court), Patna, in Criminal Appeal No. Criminal Appeal No. 81 of

2025 is set aside. Subsequently, the order of the learned J.J. Board

in J.J.B. Case No. 645 of 2025, arising out of Dhanarua P.S. Case

No. 706 of 2024, having G.R. No. 2187 of 2024 is also set aside.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1240 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
8/8

14. Let the petitioner, a child in conflict with law, be

released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees

Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to

the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Patna /

concerned Court in connection with J.J.B. Case No. 645 of 2025,

arising out of Dhanarua P.S. Case No. 706 of 2024, having G.R.

No. 2187 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be the parents of the

petitioner and the other bailor will also be relative of the

petitioner having no criminal antecedent and shall give

undertaking that he / she shall keep proper care and upkeep of the

petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain present before the

Board on each and every date of trial of the case fixed by the

Board.

15. Accordingly, the present revision petition is

allowed.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

Shahnawaz/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 25.06.2026
Transmission Date 25.06.2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.