Patna High Court
Juvenile XversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted to the juvenile as there were no reasonable grounds to deny it and granting bail is in the child’s best interest.
Summary
Juvenile X, declared a child in conflict with law, was accused of stabbing to death the son of an informant. The Juvenile Justice Board denied his bail on 23.10.2024, an appeal was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, and a revision petition was filed. The petitioner argued lack of eye‑witness, delayed FIR, and absence of material showing risk under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, while the opposite party claimed the child’s criminal family background warranted denial of bail. The High Court examined Section 12 and Section 3 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and held that bail cannot be refused merely on the seriousness of the offence or family background without concrete evidence of danger. Consequently, the court set aside the lower orders and granted bail with conditions, emphasizing the child’s best interest and right to reunite with family.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be denied to a child in conflict with law solely on the basis of the gravity of the offence under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act
- Whether there are reasonable grounds that the release of the juvenile would associate him with known criminals or expose him to danger, justifying denial of bail
- Whether the lower courts erred in not applying the best‑interest principle under Section 3 of the Juvenile Justice Act
- Whether procedural deficiencies such as delayed FIR and lack of eye‑witness affect the bail decision
Legislation cited
Subjects
- juvenile justice
- bail
- child in conflict with law
- Section 12 JJ Act
- best interest of child
- revision petition
- murder
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.215 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-584 Year-2024 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District-
Gopalganj
======================================================
Juvenile X Through his father Krishna Prasad, Son of krishna prasad Resident
of village - Kaithwaliya, P.S - Gopalganj, District - Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Brajesh Kumar S/O Late Jawahar Sah R/O Vill.- Hajiapur, Kaithwalia, Ward
No.- 8, P.S and Dist.- Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjan Kumar Srivastava, Adv.
Mr. Shashwat Srivastava, Adv.
For the State : Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP
For the OP No. 2 : Mr. Anirudh Kumar Verma, Adv.
Mr. Vyas Kr. Mishra, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 09-02-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned counsel for the
state.
02. The instant revision petition is preferred on behalf
of the petitioner for setting aside the impugned judgment dated
07.01.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st
Gopalganj in Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2024 arising out J.E.
No. 398 of 2024 in connection with Gopalganj P.S. Case No.
584 of 2024 for the offences under Section 103(1), 3(5) of the
B.N.S. whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.215 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
2/8
Judge-1st Gopalganj rejected the appeal of the petitioner for
grant of bail and the order dated 23.10.2024 of learned Juvenile
Justice Board, Gopalganj was upheld.
The present revision is also preferred against order
dated 23.10.2024 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board,
Gopalganj in Gopalganj P.S. Case No. 584 of 2024 wherein the
prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected.
03. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the son of
the informant/opposite party no. 2 went with the petitioner and
other co-accused persons and later on his dead body was
recovered and it was found he was stabbed to death.
04. The petitioner was declared a juvenile on
02.09.2024 and his prayer for bail was rejected vide order dated
23.10.2024 by the learned JJ Board in JE No. 398 of 2024
arising out of Gopalganj PS Case No. 584 of 2024. The appeal
against the said order was rejected vide judgment dated
07.01.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2024 by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gopalganj. Against these
orders, the petitioner has approached this Court in the instant
revision petition.
05. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
orders of learned Subordinate Courts are not sustainable as the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.215 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
3/8
orders have been passed without appreciation of facts and the
law. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence and
without any substantive material, this petitioner has been made
accused in this case. FIR has been lodged after delay of two
days without any satisfactory explanation. Moreover, the gravity
and seriousness of offences could not be a ground for rejection
of bail to juvenile/child in conflict with law(in short “CICL”).
There is no material on record to show that the case of the
petitioner falls in any of the conditions prescribed under Section
12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act
(in short “JJ Act”) for rejection of prayer of bail of the
petitioner. Merely on assumption that the petitioner would go in
contact with any known criminals and there is possibility of
danger to rehabilitation and reformation of the petitioner, the
prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected. Further fact
weighing on the minds of the courts below was the fact of
recovery of knife at the instance of the petitioner. But the scope
of Section 3 of the JJ Act makes it clear that the purpose of law
is to reform the child and not to penalize him for any act done in
juvenility. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is
in custody since 07.08.2024. Learned counsel further submits
that the co-accused person has been granted bail by a
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.215 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
4/8
Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.09.2025
passed in Cr. App. SJ No. 3154 of 2025.
06. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
opposite party no. 2 vehemently opposes the submission made
on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the opposite
party no. 2 submits that the learned appellate court in clear
terms held that the brother and the father used to instigate the
CICL to commit the crime and there was chance that if the
CICL is released on bail the child will come in association with
bad elements. The family members and parents of the child were
having no control over the CICL. Therefore the release of child
would not be in his best interest. The CICL is having a criminal
antecedent. The APP for the State supports the contention of the
learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
07. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submission of the parties.
08. At the outset, it is made clear that the gravity and
seriousness of the offences is immaterial for grant of bail to the
CICL has mandated under Section 12 of the JJ Act which reads
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
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.215 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
5/8
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
would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board
shall record the reasons 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 1[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.
(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
fulfil the conditions of bail order within seven
days of the bail order, such child shall be
produced before the Board for modification of the
conditions of bail.”.
09. The Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of Lalu
Kumar @ Lal Babu @ Lallu Vs The State Of Bihar, (2019) 4
PLJR 833 distinguished between the statutory provisions
regarding the bail in JJ Act and CrPC. Therefore bail could be
denied to a CICL only on the ground that release would bring
him in association with known criminals or it will cause moral,
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.215 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
6/8
physical and psychological danger to the child or it would defeat
the ends of justice. Further in Section 3 of the JJ Act there are
some salutary provisions governing the well being of a CICL
and foremost of them is the presumption of innocence.
Thereafter Section 3(iv) of the JJ Act 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 JJ Act makes it abundantly clear
that a child shall be placed in institutional care as a step of last
resort after making a reasonable inquiry. Section 3(xiii) of the
JJ Act provides for Principle of repatriation and restoration
which reads as follows:
“Every child in the juvenile justice system shall have
the right to be re-united with his family at the earliest and to be
restored to the same socio-economic and cultural status that he
was in, before coming under the purview of this Act, unless such
restoration and repatriation is not in his best interest.”
10. Cumulative reading of Section 12 of the JJ Act
and Section 3 of the JJ Act shows the under current flowing in
the JJ Act is regarding reformation of child. The CICL is not to
be punished rather it would be for the betterment of the society
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.215 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
7/8
that any such child is allowed to join the main stream and is not
stigmatized. In the present case, though the social investigation
report and the social background report has been discussed in
the order of the learned district courts that there might be chance
of child coming into association with known criminals or
suffering moral, physical and psychological danger and thus his
release would defeat the ends of justice, yet, I think considering
the fact that the child has been kept in custody for quite long
time and has been away from his family and the same could not
be said to be in the best interest of the child though it has come
that the petitioner comes from a criminal family background but
there is absence of material to support such contention.
Therefore, in order to reunite the petitioner with his family, I am
of the considered opinion that it would be in paramount interest
of the petitioner that for his further development and growth,
petitioner/juvenile in conflict with law be released on bail and
hence is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds
of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
J.J.Board, Gopalganj/concerned court, in connection with JE
No. 398 of 2024 arising out of Gopalganj P.S. Case No. 584 of
2024, subject to the following conditions:
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.215 of 2025 dt.09-02-2026
8/8
(i) One of the bailors will be the parents
of the petitioner and other bailor will also
be relative of the petitioner having no
criminal antecedent and giving
undertaking that he/she shall keep proper
care and upkeep of the appellant.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain present
before the Board on each and every date
of trial of the case fixed by the Board
and shall fully co-operate in the pending
enquiry/trial.
11. Accordingly, the judgment dated 07.01.2025
passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st Gopalganj and
order dated 23.10.2024 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice
Board, Gopalganj are set aside and present revision petition is
allowed.
12. Office is directed to return the Lower Court
Record forthwith.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Anuradha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 10.02.2026
Transmission Date 10.02.2026
Checking your session…