Patna High Court
XversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
A juvenile accused of non‑bailable offences is entitled to bail unless the release would expose him to criminal association, danger, or defeat the ends of justice.
Summary
The petitioner, a 17-year-old child in conflict with law (CICL), was charged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS for assault leading to death. The District and Additional Sessions Judge had refused bail, prompting a criminal revision. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the allegations were general, other co‑accused had been granted bail, and the Social Investigation Report indicated no risk of non‑reformation. The court considered the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, particularly the spirit of Section 12 and the precedent in Lalu Kumar v. State of Bihar, which holds that bail for juveniles should not be denied unless specific risks exist. Finding no such risks and noting the mother’s willingness to act as surety, the court set aside the lower court’s order. Consequently, the revision was allowed and bail was granted on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions imposed on the parents.
Issues considered
- Whether a juvenile accused of offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS is entitled to bail despite the offences being non‑bailable.
- Whether the lower court’s refusal to grant bail was inconsistent with the objectives of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 103(1), 3(5)
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12
Subjects
- bail
- juvenile justice
- criminal revision
- observation home
- social investigation report
- non‑bailable offence
- section 12
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.259 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-245 Year-2025 Thana- LAHERIYASARAI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
X Sri Arvind Kumar Yadav Resident of Village of Barsam, P.S. - Rudhpur,
District - Madhubani, Bihar. Through his Father Arvind Kumar Yadav S/o
Ramsundar Yadav R/o Village - Barsram, P.S. - Rudhpur, Dist. - Madhubani,
Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sumit Kumar Jha, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 11-06-2026
Heard the parties.
2. The present application is being preferred against
the order dated 24.01.2026 passed by learned District and
Addl. Sessions Judge 1st, Darbhanga in connection with Cr.
Appeal No. 23 of 2025, Laherisarai P.S. Case No. 245 of
2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and
3(5) of BNS by which the learned Court has refused to
enlarge the petitioner/revisionist on bail.
3. The Child in conflict with law (for short
‘CICL’)/petitioner, aged about 17 years and 6 months on the
alleged date of occurrence, is named in F.I.R. and is in
observation home since 12.04.2025.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.259 of 2026 dt.11-06-2026
2/5
4. As per FIR, petitioner along with other co-
accused persons assaulted the deceased, as a result of which
he became unconscious and subsequently died.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
CICL/petitioner submitted that allegation against
petitioner/CICL is very much general and omnibus in nature
and other co-accused persons facing similar allegation were
granted bail namely Dipak Kumar through Cr. Misc. No.
31398 of 2026 dated 08.05.2026, Samresh Kumar through
Cr. Misc. No. 83640 of 2025 dated 25.03.2026, Pankaj
Kumar through Cr. Misc. No. 26186 of 2026 dated
22.04.2026 and Nitish Kumar and Deepak Yadav through
Cr. Misc. No. 83714 of 2025 & Cr. Misc. No. 3312 of 2026
dated 23.02.2026. It is further pointed out that through
Social Investigation Report of petitioner/revisionist, which is
already mentioned in impugned judgment itself, it nowhere
reveals that CICL may not improve him in future as to join
the main stream of civilized society, therefore, there is no
harm to release the juvenile under the supervision and care
of his mother, who is ready to extend his care and love to
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.259 of 2026 dt.11-06-2026
3/5
the petitioner.
6. Learned APP opposed the prayer for bail.
7. Having regard to the submissions and materials
showing that the CICL/petitioner has been adjudged juvenile
aged about 17 years and 6 months on the alleged date of
occurrence, and also as CICL/petitioner has remained in the
Observation Home since 12.04.2025 and his mother is ready
to stand as a surety and furnish an undertaking that if
released on bail he will take care of the CICL/petitioner and
shall ensure that he does not fall in bad company and, in
case, the petitioner indulges in any unlawful act, he will
inform it to the jurisdictional police station as also following
the spirit of section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and in view of the
exceptions carved out by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this
Court in the case of Lalu Kumar and Ors. Vs. The State
of Bihar reported in 2019 (4) PLJR 833 that classification
of the offences under the bailable and non-bailable sections
would not be relevant for the purpose of grant of bail to a
juvenile and the prayer for bail of a juvenile may be rejected
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.259 of 2026 dt.11-06-2026
4/5
only under one of the three conditions, which are as under:-
“(i) The release is likely to bring that person into
association with any known criminal;
(ii) The release is likely to expose the said person to
moral or physiological danger; and
(iii) The release would defeat the ends of justice.”
8. Having regard to the submissions made by the
parties and taking into consideration the materials on record
as well as the period of incarceration of the petitioner/CICL
and in the best interest of CICL, this Court is of the
considered view that the impugned order passed by the court
below is not in consonance with the aims and objectives of
the Act. Even social investigation report suggests scope of
reform and nothing adverse was noticed against him.
9. In view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, as petitioner/CICL is prima-facie facing
general and omnibus allegation, coupled with the fact as
similarly situated co-accused persons have already granted
bail by different learned Co-ordinate Benches of this court,
where Social Investigation Report (SIR) nowhere suggests
that CICL/petitioner cannot be reformed in future as to join
the main stream of society, accordingly, the order dated
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.259 of 2026 dt.11-06-2026
5/5
24.01.2026 passed by learned District and Addl. Sessions
Judge 1st Darbhanga, in connection with Laherisarai P.S.
Case No. 245 of 2025 is hereby set aside.
10.The criminal revision application stands allowed.
11. Let the CICL-petitioner, named-above, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District
and Addl. Sessions Judge 1st Darbhanga, in connection with
Laherisarai P.S. Case No. 245 of 2025 on the following
conditions:-
(i) That one of the sureties should be the
mother of the CICL/petitioner; and
(ii) That the father of the CICL/petitioner shall
file an affidavit before the learned Juvenile
Justice Board, Patna, giving specific undertaking
that after release of the CICL/petitioner on bail,
he will take proper care of the petitioner and will
not allow him to fall into bad company.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
S.Tripathi/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 11.06.2026
Transmission Date 11.06.2026
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.