Patna High Court
XXXXX @ XXXXversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The High Court held that bail must be granted to the child accused as none of the statutory grounds for denial under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 are established.
Summary
The petitioners, two minors aged 11 and 12, were accused of murdering a child and were denied bail by the Juvenile Justice Board, a decision affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge. They filed a criminal revision under Section 102, arguing that the denial violated the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which mandates bail unless specific statutory grounds are proven. The High Court examined Section 12 of the Act, emphasizing the principles of best interest, repatriation, and that the nature of the offence cannot alone justify denial of bail. Finding no evidence that the children would contact criminal elements, face danger, or that justice would be defeated by their release, the Court set aside both the appellate and JJB orders. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the minors with conditions ensuring parental and relative sureties and attendance at trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be denied to a child in conflict with law under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
- Whether the grounds of contact with criminal elements, danger to moral/physical/psychological well‑being, or defeat of the ends of justice are satisfied in the present case.
- Whether the nature and gravity of the alleged offence can be a ground to refuse bail to a child.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 102
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12, 3(iv), 3(xii), 3(xiii)
Subjects
- bail
- child in conflict with law
- Juvenile Justice Act
- best interest of child
- revision
- criminal procedure
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.1278 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- KUWARI District- Araria
======================================================
1. XXXXX @ XXXX S/o Kundan Sharma R/o Village - Sundari, Dumariya,
Ward no. 08, P.S.- Kuwari, District - Araria Living under guardianship of his
mother namely Sonmati Devi, aged about 29 Years, Female, W/o Kundan
Sharma, R/o Village - Sundari, Dumariya, P.S - Kuwari, District - Araria
2. YYYY @ YYYY S/o Arjun Sharma R/o Village - Sundari, Dumariya, P.S.-
Kuwari, District - Araria Living under guardianship of his mother namely
Dukhni Devi, aged about 35 Years, W/o Arjun Sharma, R/o Village -
Sundari, Dumariya, P.S - Kuwari, District - Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pramod Sharma S/o Darshan Lal Sharma R/o Village - Sundari, Ward No.
08, P.S - Kuwari, District - Araria
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Madhav Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP
For the Informant/O.P.No.2: Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, Advocate
Mrs. Kusum Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-06-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant/opposite party no. 2.
02. The instant criminal revision application has
been preferred by the petitioners under Section 102 of the Act of
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1278 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
2/8
2015 challenging the judgment dated 12.09.2025 passed in
Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2025 by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I cum Special Judge (Children Court), Araria,
whereby the order dated 03.05.2025 passed by the learned
Juvenile Justice Board, Araria in JJB Case No. 19 of 2025
arising out of Kuwari P.S. Case No. 08 of 2025 has been
affirmed and the appeal preferred by the petitioners has been
dismissed.
03. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the petitioners have been made accused in Kuwari P.S. Case
No. 08 of 2025 which has been instituted on the basis of
fardbeyan of Pramod Sharma. The informant alleged that the
petitioners and other co-accused persons murdered his minor
son and threw his dead body in a pond. The petitioners were
apprehended on 19.02.2025. The learned Juvenile Justice Board
assessed the age of the petitioners and vide order dated
12.03.2025 recorded its finding that the petitioners were
children in conflict with law ('CICL') as they were aged about
11 years 10 months 18 days and 12 years 10 months 21 days,
respectively on the date of occurrence. The learned Juvenile
Justice Board rejected the prayer of the petitioners for bail vide
order dated 03.05.2025. Against the rejection order, petitioners
approached the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1278 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
3/8
cum Special (Children Court), Araria by filing Criminal Appeal
No. 24 of 2025. However, the learned appellate court also
dismissed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and rejected the
criminal appeal. Feeling aggrieved by the order by the learned
appellate court, the petitioners have approached this Court in the
instant criminal revision.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioners further
submits that the orders passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board
as well as learned appellate court are not sustainable as the
orders have been passed against the fact and law. The learned
appellate court failed to appreciate that the petitioners are
innocent and it is a case of false implication. Learned Juvenile
Justice Board went on to hold that the release of the petitioners
would not be in the best interest of the petitioners and would
expose them to physical and psychological danger. At the same
time, learned appellate court rejected the prayer for bail
considering the nature of allegation, present stage of the case
and also on the ground that the release of the petitioners was
likely to bring them into association with known criminals or
expose them to moral, physical or psychological danger but
there is hardly any material to show that there was physical or
psychological danger to the petitioners. The nature and gravity
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1278 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
4/8
of the offence is immaterial for grant of bail to a child in conflict
with law as has been made clear by Section 12 of the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Learned
counsel further submits that both the learned courts below have
failed to appreciate the statutory provisions prescribed under the
Act of 2015 and the ratio laid down by this Court in the case of
Lalu Kumar & Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar & Ors, reported in
2019 (4) PLJR 833. Learned counsel further submits that the
parents of the petitioners are ready to take care of their child.
The petitioners have got clean antecedent. The petitioners are in
custody since 19.02.2025 and cognizance has been taken.
05. Learned APP for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant/opposite party no. 2 vehemently
oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that there
is specific allegation against the petitioners that they killed the
minor son of the informant and threw his dead body in a pond.
If the petitioners are released on bail, it would defeat the ends of
justice.
06. I have given my thoughtful consideration to
the rival submission of the parties and perused the record.
07. Section 12 of the Act of 2015 makes it clear
that a CICL could be denied bail only on the ground that on
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1278 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
5/8
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.
08. 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 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 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
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1278 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
6/8
CICL’s best interest.
09. 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 Courts for reformation and rehabilitation of a CICL.
10. From the record, I find that the petitioners
were CICL at the time of occurrence and they remained in
custody for more than one year and four months and bear clean
antecedent. From the order of the learned appellate court, I
hardly find any material to show that there is any basis before the
learned appellate court to arrive at its finding that release of the
petitioners would allow them to come in contact with their
previous associates and their social, physical and psychological
well being would come to any harm and the ends of justice
would be defeated. Moreover, the purpose of the Act of 2015 is
the reformation of the child and the institutionalization of a CICL
is a matter of last resort and could not be employed to thinking
that such custody would be for betterment of the child and
would psychologically make him a good citizen. This is possible
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1278 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
7/8
only under the guardianship of the parents and other family
members. Further, the nature of offence cannot be made a ground
to refuse bail to a CICL as held in case of Lalu Kumar & Ors.
(Supra).
11. Keeping these facts into mind, the orders
impugned cannot be sustained.
12. Accordingly, the judgment dated 12.09.2025
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2025 by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I cum Special Judge (Children Court),
Araria is set aside. Consequently, the order dated 03.05.2025
passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Araria in JJB Case
No. 19 of 2025 arising out of Kuwari P.S. Case No. 08 of 2025
rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioners is also set aside.
13. The petitioners, CICL, are directed to be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice Board,
Araria/concerned court in connection with JJB Case No. 19 of
2025 arising out of Kuwari P.S. Case No. 08 of 2025, subject to
the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be the parents of
the petitioners and other bailor will also be
relative of the petitioners having no
criminal antecedent and shall give
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1278 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
8/8
undertaking that he/she shall keep proper
care and upkeep of the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain present
before the Board on each and every date of
trial of the case fixed by the Board.
14. The revision petition stands allowed.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
DKS/-
AFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 01.07.2026
Transmission Date 01.07.2026
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.