Patna High Court
XXXXversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
Bail cannot be denied to a child in conflict with law unless there are reasonable grounds that release would expose the child to criminal association, moral, physical or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice; in the absence of such grounds, bail must be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, a 12-year-old child in conflict with law, was charged with offences including rape under the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. He was denied bail by the Juvenile Justice Board and the denial was upheld by the Special Judge (Children Court). The petitioner filed a revision petition arguing that he was falsely implicated, had no prior record, and that bail denial was not justified under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The High Court examined Section 12 of the Act, which permits bail for a child unless there are reasonable grounds that release would expose the child to danger, criminal association, or defeat the ends of justice, and also considered the principles of best interest of the child under Section 3. Finding no material to show such risks, the Court held that bail must be granted and set aside the lower orders. Accordingly, the petitioner was released on bail subject to conditions and the revision petition was allowed.
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 despite the seriousness of the alleged offences.
- Whether the lower courts erred in refusing bail without demonstrating the statutory grounds for denial.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 313, 34, 341, 376, 417
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12, 3
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 6
Subjects
- juvenile justice
- bail
- child in conflict with law
- POCSO Act
- presumption of innocence
- best interest of child
- revision petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.484 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Anwar @ Anwar S/O Md. Kalam @ Kalam@ Abdul Kalam Resident of
village-Diyari (Rampur Kodarkatti), Police Station and District-Araria
through his natural guardian, who is his father, namely, Md. Kalam @ Kalam
son of late Magrim.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rahmina Praween D/O- Harun R/O Vill- Diayri, Ward No.07, P.S. and
District- Araria
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar Rana, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 06-01-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
02. The instant revision petition has been filed for
setting aside the Judgment/Order dated 04.03.2025 passed in
Criminal Appeal No. 06 of 2025 by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court) Araria
whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge (Children
Court) Araria dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and also to
set aside the order dated 13.01.2025 passed by the Juvenile
Justice Board, Araria rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for
bail in connection with J.J.B. Case No.117 of 2024 arising out
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
2/10
of Araria Mahila PS Case No. 44 of 2024 for the offences under
Section 341, 376, 313, 417/34 of the IPC and Section 6 of the
POCSO Act.
03. Briefly stated facts of the case leading to the
institution of the present petition is that the opposite party no. 2
lodged a case vide Araria Mahila P.S. Case No. 44 of 2024
under Section 341, 376, 313, 417/34 of the IPC and Section 6 of
the POCSO Act with allegation that the while she was alone in
her house, this petitioner forced upon her by gagging her mouth
and later on gave her allurement of marriage. By giving this
inducement of marriage, he kept on committing rape with her.
When she became pregnant, the petitioner gave her some
medication and her pregnancy was aborted by taking her to a
doctor. The petitioner refused to marry the opposite party no. 2
and in panchayati the petitioner and his family members refused
to solemnize marriage with the opposite party no. 2. The
petitioner/child in conflict with law (in short ‘CICL’) was taken
in custody on 17.10.2024. The CICL moved before the learned
Juvenile Justice Board, Araria for grant of bail but his prayer
was rejected and his petition for bail was dismissed vide order
dated 13.01.2025. The CICL preferred an appeal which also
came to be dismissed vide order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
3/10
learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum Special Judge
(Children’s Court) Araria. The CICL approached this Court
impugning the aforesaid two orders.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is falsely implicated in this case due to ill motive of
the victim. The petitioner was declared juvenile vide order dated
30.10.2024 by the JJB Araria and the age of the petitioner was
12 years 06 months and 21 days on the date of occurrence and
has got no criminal antecedent. The age of the victim is about 18
years. Learned counsel further submits that the orders of the
learned Courts below are bad in the eye of law as well as on
facts. The Courts have not considered about false implication of
the CICL and the fact that he has been deprived of care and
protection of his family by placing him in custody. There is no
possibility of petitioner doing any harm to the victim or any of
the witnesses. The social investigation report and social
background report do not make out any case to keep the CICL in
custody. It has only been mentioned that there was lack of
discipline in the house and father of the CICL is a labourer. It
has also been mentioned that the CICL has studied up to Class V
only. His friends are also not literate. However the same report
also mentions about his clean antecedent and normal mental
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
4/10
condition. Further the parents of the CICL are ready to take care
of him and for his proper physical and mental development, he
needs to be enlarged on bail as his continuous custody would be
detrimental to his mental and physical well being. There is no
chance of CICL falling in bad company and his family members
are also not having any criminal antecedent. Therefore the
petitioner ought to have been released on bail after setting aside
the impugned orders as both the Courts below passed erroneous
orders.
05. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
opposite party no. 2 vehemently contends that the offence of the
CICL is very serious. He committed rape with a girl and the
victim has also stated the fact in her statement recorded under
Section 183 of the BNSS. Learned counsel further submits that
in the social investigation report and social background report, it
has also come that there was general lack of discipline in the
house of the CICL. He was having a peer group of illiterate
friends. The CICL comes from a very poor social and economic
background and there was lack of education and values of a
modal society which might influence the CICL. If the CICL is
enlarged on bail, he might commit same offence and might also
influence the trial.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
5/10
06. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submission of the parties.
07. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 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
abailable or non-bailable offence, is
apprehended or detained 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
home1[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
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
6/10
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.”
08. The aforesaid provision 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 and there
was danger to the moral, physical and psychological well being
of the CICL or would defeat the ends of justice. If these grounds
are not present, the bail could no be denied to a CICL.
09. Now, at the same time, relevant portion of Section
3 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,
2015, inter alia, provides for the general principles of care and
protection of children and are extracted herein below:-
“The Central Government, the State
Governments,1[the Board, the Committee,
or] other agencies, as the case may be,
while implementing the provisions of this
Act shall be guided by the following
fundamental principles, namely:---
(i)Principle of presumption of innocence:
Any child shall be presumed to be an
innocent of any mala fide or criminal intent
up to the age of eighteen years.
(ii)Principle of dignity and worth: All
human beings shall be treated with equal
dignity and rights.
(iii)Principle of participation: Every child
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
7/10
shall have a right to be heard and to
participate in all processes and decisions
affecting his interest and the childs views
shall be taken into consideration with due
regard to the age and maturity of the child.
(iv)Principle of best interest: 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.
(v)Principle of family responsibility: The
primary responsibility of care, nurture and
protection of the child shall be that of the
biological family or adoptive or foster
parents, as the case may be.
(vi)Principle of safety: All measures shall
be taken to ensure that the child is safe and
is not subjected to any harm, abuse or
maltreatment while in contact with the care
and protection system, and thereafter
(vi)…
(vii)…
(viii)Principle of non-stigmatising
semantics: Adversarial or accusatory words
are not to be used in the processes
pertaining to a child.
(ix)…
(x)…
(xi)...
(xii)Principle of institutionalisation as a
measure of last resort: A child shall be
placed in institutional care as a step of last
resort after making a reasonable inquiry.
(xiii)Principle of repatriation and
restoration: 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.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
8/10
(xiv)...
(xv)…
(xvi)...”
10. Cumulative reading of these two provisions show
the CICL could 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
endanger his moral, physical or psychological well being.
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
child in conflict with law.
11. In the facts of the present case, no doubt the
alleged offence is very serious but the bail to a child in conflict
with law could be denied only under specific circumstances as
mentioned hereinbefore. Otherwise the bail is a rule and jail is
an exception in case of CICL as well. The CICL has remained in
custody since 17.10.2024 and now his parents are ready and
willing to take care of him and to protect his best interest so that
he does not fall in bad company or get involved in any other
offence.
12. Perusal of the impugned order show the bail was
denied on the ground that release of the child in conflict with
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
9/10
law would be against the best interest of the child and the
possibility of child suffering mental, physical or psychological
danger could not be ruled out. Further from the record, I do not
find any material to infer that the child would come in contact
with some known criminal or if released he will suffer mental,
physical or psychological harm. For reformatory measures and
rehabilitation, the best place could be the house of the child and
the parents of the child in conflict with law have also
undertaken to take care of the best interest of the child.
13. Therefore, in the light of the aforesaid discussion,
I am of the considered opinion that the child in conflict with law
could be released on bail and accordingly petitioner/CICL 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, Araria
/concerned court, in connection with J.J.B. Case No.117 of 2024
arising out of Araria Mahila PS Case No. 44 of 2024, subject to
the following conditions:
(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 shall give
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.484 of 2025 dt.06-01-2026
10/10
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.
14.Accordingly, the Judgment/Order dated 04.03.2025
passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special
Judge (Children Court) Araria and order dated 13.01.2025
passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Araria are set aside and
hence, the present revision petition stands allowed.
15. Office is directed to return the lower court record
forthwith.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Anuradha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 08.01.2026
Transmission Date 08.01.2026
Checking your session…