XXversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   CRIMINAL REVISION No.127 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-609 Year-2023 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East
                                                       Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 XX Son of Akhilesh Mishra Resident Of Village - Dharhari, Ps- Chiraiya,
                 Dist- East Champaran through its natural Guardian Mother Pushpa Devi
                 Female aged about 41 years Wife of Akhilesh Mishra Resident of village-
                 Dharhari, ps- Chiraiya, Dist- East Champaran

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Shambha Devi Wife of Videshi Mahato Resident of village- Mahadeva Ps-
                 Ghorasahan, Dist- East Champaran

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :        Mr. Shashi Bhushan Pandey, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :        Mr. Anil Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANSUL
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   26-05-2026                  Heard the parties.

                               2. The present Criminal Revision application has been

                   filed on behalf of the petitioner against the order dated

                   02.08.2025 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, East

                   Champaran at Motihari in JJB Trial No. 1666 of 2024, arising

                   out of Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 609 of 2023, registered under

                   Sections 302/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27

                   of the Arms Act, whereby the prayer for bail of the petitioner

                   was rejected. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated

                   14.11.2025 passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions

                   Judge-I, East Champaran at Motihari in Criminal Appeal No. 30
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.127 of 2026(5) dt.26-05-2026
                                             2/5




          of 2025, arising out of Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 609/2023,

          whereby the learned Appellate Court affirmed the order passed

          by the learned Juvenile Justice Board.

                       3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          FIR was lodged against unknown persons. The allegation is that

          the son of the informant was killed by unknown miscreants.

          During investigation, one Sahil Kumar @ Sahil Yadav was

          arrested. He admitted the occurrence and stated that in the first

          part of the incident, he along with the petitioner was going to a

          fair, where miscreants attempted to molest a lady, and that

          thereafter, in retaliation, one Subodh Kumar fired upon the

          deceased. The name of the petitioner surfaced in the

          confessional statement of co-accused Sahil Kumar. No role has

          been assigned to the petitioner in the second part of the

          occurrence. The only allegation against him is that he was

          present at the fair along with others. It is further submitted that

          the father of the petitioner is willing to accept responsibility for

          his son and to furnish the requisite undertaking before the

          learned Board.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing for the State has

          opposed the prayer for bail.

                       5. Having considered the submissions of the parties
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.127 of 2026(5) dt.26-05-2026
                                             3/5




          and on perusal of the materials available on record, this Court

          finds that the FIR was instituted against unknown persons and

          the implication of the petitioner rests solely upon the

          confessional statement of co-accused Sahil Kumar. It is well

          settled that the confessional statement of a co-accused is a weak

          form of evidence and cannot, by itself, sustain the charge

          against another accused — a fortiori, it cannot be treated as

          sufficient material to deny the benefit of bail at this stage. There

          is no allegation in the FIR or in the materials on record that the

          petitioner was present at the place where the firing was done or

          that he participated in the act of firing causing the death of the

          deceased. Nothing adverse appears against the petitioner in the

          FIR. Further, there is no material on record to prima facie make

          out the charge of criminal conspiracy under Section 120B IPC

          insofar as the petitioner is concerned, his only stated role being

          that of a co-traveller to the fair. Since the petitioner is a juvenile,

          the applicable standard for bail is that prescribed under Section

          12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,

          2015, which mandates release of a juvenile on bail unless the

          Court finds reasonable grounds to believe that such release is

          likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or

          expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger, or that
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.127 of 2026(5) dt.26-05-2026
                                             4/5




          his release would defeat the ends of justice. No such ground is

          made out from the materials available. The impugned orders,

          having declined bail without adequately applying this statutory

          standard, suffer from material irregularity and cannot be

          sustained.

                       6. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 02.08.2025

          passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, East Champaran at

          Motihari in JJB Trial No. 1666 of 2024, arising out of

          Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 609 of 2023, and the order dated

          14.11.2025 passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions

          Judge-I, East Champaran at Motihari in Criminal Appeal No. 30

          of 2025, arising out of Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 609/2023, are

          hereby set aside.

                       7. The Revision Application is accordingly allowed.

                       8. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail

          in connection with JJB Trial No. 1666 of 2024, arising out of

          Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 609 of 2023, on furnishing bail bonds

          of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties

          of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned

          Juvenile Justice Board, East Champaran at Motihari, subject to

          the condition that the natural guardian/father of the petitioner

          shall furnish an undertaking before the learned Board that he
            Patna High Court CR. REV. No.127 of 2026(5) dt.26-05-2026
                                                         5/5




                      shall keep proper care, supervision and watch over the conduct

                      and activities of the juvenile and shall ensure that the juvenile

                      does not come in association with known criminals or indulge in

                      any unlawful activities. It is further directed that the concerned

                      Probation Officer shall periodically monitor the conduct of the

                      petitioner and submit a report before the learned Board.


                                                        (Ansul, J)

Ranjeet/-

U      T