RKversusThe State of Bihar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                          CRIMINAL REVISION No.1248 of 2025
           Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2025 Thana- TIKAPATTI District- Purnia
     ======================================================
     X1
                                                 ... ... Petitioner
                              Versus

1.   The State of Bihar
2.    Nandni Devi Wife of Ratan Kumar, Resident of Baidra Tola (Tikapatti), P.S.-
      Tikapatti, P.O.-Tikapatti, District- Purnea, Pin Code-854101.
                                                                 ... ... Respondents
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner        :      Mr. Arun Kumar Mandal, Advocate
     For the State             :      Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, 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. Despite filing of vakalatnama on behalf

      of informant / OP No. 2, there is no representation on behalf of the

      OP No. 2.

                          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 (for

      brevity, “the Act of 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
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1248 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
                                            2/7




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

                         4. The instant criminal revision petition is directed

         against the order dated 03.11.2025 passed by the learned

         Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Children’s Court,

         Purnea, in Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2025, whereby and

         whereunder the appeal was dismissed and the order of learned

         Juvenile Justice Board, Purnea dated 03.06.2025 passed in

         Tikapatti P.S. Case No. 25 of 2025 for offences punishable under

         Section 64 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO

         Act has been affirmed and the appeal preferred by the petitioner

         has been dismissed.

                         5. As per prosecution case, Tikapatti P.S. Case No. 25

         of 2025 has been instituted under Section 64 of the B.N.S., 2023

         and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act on the basis of written

         report of informant Nandini Devi. In her written report informant

         had stated that the petitioner committed rape with her six year old

         daughter and also assaulted her. The petitioner has been taken into

         custody on 11.02.2025. In the course of enquiry, the learned J.J.

         Board, Purnea determined the age of the petitioner and found it to

         be thirteen years one month and nine days at the time of

         occurrence vide its order dated 24.06.2025 and declared the

         petitioner to be a CICL. Prior to that, the prayer for bail

         of the petitioner / CICL was rejected             vide order dated
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1248 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
                                            3/7




         03.06.2025 by the learned J.J. Board.

                         6. Being aggrieved by the order dated 03.11.2025

         passed by the Appellate Court, the petitioner / CICL has moved the

         present revision petition before this Court.

                         7. Learned counsel for the petitioner / CICL submits

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

         due to previous land dispute. No occurrence as alleged in the FIR

         has ever taken place. The learned Appellate Court did not consider

         the fact that there was no adverse material or evidence available on

         record against the petitioner / CICL and for this reason reliance on

         social investigation report for making inference that if released on

         bail, the petitioner / CICL may repeat the same offence or might

         come in contact of criminal elements or bad influence or there was

         threat to the victim or the informant from the petitioner / CICL is

         not correct. He further submits that the social investigation report

         rather shows clean antecedent of the petitioner / CICL and his

         neighbourhood persons have given favourable opinion about the

         petitioner / CICL. Learned counsel further submits that another

         aspect of the matter is that the learned Appellate Court went by the

         nature and gravity of offence. However, the seriousness and

         gravity of offence cannot be made a ground for rejection under

         Section 12 of the J.J. Act. He further submits that the father of the

         petitioner / CICL undertakes that he would take care of his son and
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1248 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
                                            4/7




         would not let him come in contact with any criminal elements or

         bad influence that would expose him to moral, physical or

         psychological danger. He further undertakes that his son would not

         repeat the offence in future if released on bail. He further submits

         that the impugned order is not sustainable and the same may be set

         aside and the petitioner / CICL may be enlarged on bail.

                         8. Learned APP for the State vehemently oppose the

         submissions made on behalf of the petitioner / CICL and submits

         that during investigation the Police came to know that the

         petitioner / CICL indulged in unnatural sex with a child of six

         years and this shows the perverse nature of act of the petitioner /

         CICL.

                         9. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the

         rival submissions advanced by the parties and perused the record.

                         10. Section 12 of the Act of 2015 makes it clear that a

         CICL could be denied bail only on the ground that on release, the

         said child would come in contact with criminal elements or there

         was danger to the moral, physical and psychological well being of

         the CICL or the release would defeat the ends of justice. If these

         grounds are not present, the bail could not be denied to a CICL.

                         11. Further, the Act of 2015 is, in fact, child friendly.

         The central theme is that the interest of child is supreme. Section 3

         of the Act of 2015 incorporates the general principles to be
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1248 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
                                            5/7




         followed in the administration of the Act. According to which, “all

         decisions regarding the child shall be based on the primary

         consideration that they are in the best interest of the child and to

         help the child to develop full potential. In fact, Section 3(iv) of the

         Act of 2015 provides for the principle of best interest and for all

         decisions regarding the child shall be based on the primary

         consideration that they are in the best interest of the child and to

         help the child to develop full potential. Section 3(xii) of the Act of

         2015 makes it abundantly clear that a child shall be placed in

         institutional care as a step of last resort after making a reasonable

         inquiry. Further, Section 3(xiii) of the the Act of 2015 provides for

         Principle of repatriation and restoration stating that a CICL shall

         have the right to re-unite with his family and be restored to the

         social, cultural and the economic background that he came from

         unless such restoration and repartition is not in the CICL’s best

         interest.

                         12. Cumulative reading of aforesaid provisions show

         the CICL should be released on bail unless the fact comes on

         record that there was chance of such child coming in contact with

         a known criminal or enlarging such child on bail might expose him

         to moral, physical or psychological danger. Further, the Courts

         being parens patriae are supposed to look into for protection of

         best interest of the child. All such steps are to be taken by the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1248 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
                                            6/7




         Courts for reformation and rehabilitation of a CICL. The petitioner

         / CICL is having clean antecedent.

                         13. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Court

         dated 03.11.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-

         I-cum-Special Judge, Children’s Court, Purnea in Criminal Appeal

         No. 15 of 2025 is set aside. Subsequently, the order of the learned

         J.J. Board in Tikapatti P.S. Case No. 25 of 2025 is also set aside.

                         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, Purnea /

         concerned Court in connection with Tikapatti P.S. Case No. 25 of

         2025 , 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 is6

         allowed.
             Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1248 of 2025 dt.23-06-2026
                                                         7/7




                                      16. The office is directed to send back the LCR to the

                      court concerned forthwith.



                                                                 (Arun Kumar Jha, J)

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