Patna High Court
XXXXversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
Bail must be granted to a child in conflict with law unless there are reasonable grounds that release would expose the child to criminal association or moral, physical or psychological danger, which were absent in the present case.
Summary
The petitioner, a 16-year‑old juvenile, was charged under several offences of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and denied bail by the Juvenile Justice Board and the Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner contended that his detention violated the principles of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, especially the presumption of innocence and best‑interest standards. The State argued that the offence was serious and that release could expose the child to criminal elements. The Court examined Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, which permits bail for a child in conflict with law unless there are reasonable grounds to believe release would endanger the child or associate him with known criminals. Finding no material to support such grounds, the Court held that bail is the rule and custody the exception for juveniles. Consequently, the revision petition was allowed, the earlier orders were set aside, and bail was granted subject to conditions.
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 lower courts erred in denying bail on the basis of the child’s best interest without sufficient evidence of danger or criminal association.
- Whether the disclosure of the juvenile’s identity in the cause title violates Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 140(1), 303(2), 3(5)
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12, 3, 74
Subjects
- bail
- child in conflict with law
- Juvenile Justice Act
- best interest of child
- identity protection
- criminal revision
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.645 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2025 Thana- RAJAPAKAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
XXXX
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ratnesh Kumar S/o- Bhola Rai Village- Utari Gangajal Bakarpur Ps-
Rajapakar Dist- Vaishali
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the O.P.-State : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Satya Prakash Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
2. From perusal of record, it transpires that in the
revision petition, the identity details of the Juvenile is being
disclosed, which is against the statutory provisions prescribed
under Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 which mandates protection of disclosure of
identity of the juvenile in conflict with law. Therefore, the
identity of the petitioner is being referred to in the cause title as
XXXX.
3. Registry while uploading the order on the website
shall also ensure that the cause title is reflected in similar
manner.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
2/11
4. The instant revision petition has been filed for
setting aside the Judgment/Order dated 18.06.2025 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge
(Children Court), Vaishali at Hajipur in Criminal Appeal No. 11
of 2025 whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge
(Children Court) dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and also
to set aside the order dated 24.04.2025 passed by the Juvenile
Justice Board, Vaishali at Hajipur rejecting the prayer of the
petitioner for bail in connection with J.J.B. Case No. 44 of 2025
arising out of Rajapakar PS Case No. 39 of 2025 for the
offences under Sections 115(2), 109, 303(2), 140(1), 3(5) of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
5. Briefly stated, facts of the case leading to the
institution of the present petition are that the opposite party no.
2 lodged a case vide Rajapakar P.S. Case No. 39 of 2025 under
Sections 115(2), 109, 303(2), 140(1), 3(5) alleging there in that
in the night of 30.01.2025, the brother of the informant/opposite
party no. 2, namely Gautam Kumar, received a telephone call
from the petitioner. Subsequently, the petitioner arrived at the
door of the informant, took his brother away on his motorcycle.
After some time, the informant received a phone call from his
brother that the petitioner was attempting to kill him and his
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
3/11
brother also told him that the petitioner along with other co-
accused persons forcibly abducted him and took him to some
other place and subjected him to severe physical assault. Due to
this assault, brother of the informant sustained injuries and he
was thrown out of the vehicle near six-lane highway at
Kalyanpur where the informant and his family members found
him unconscious. Thereafter, the informant’s brother was
admitted to CHC, Rajapakar and after that he was shifted to a
private hospital. The petitioner was declared juvenile by the
learned J.J. Board, Vaishali at Hajipur vide order dated
02.04.2025 as his age was 16 years and 10 months at the time of
alleged occurrence. The petitioner/child in conflict with law (in
short ‘CICL’) was taken in custody on 01.02.2025. The CICL
moved before the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Vaishali at
Hajipur for grant of bail but his prayer was rejected vide order
dated 24.04.2025. The CICL preferred an appeal which also
came to be dismissed vide order dated 18.06.2025 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum Special Judge
(Children’s Court) Vaishali at Hajipur. The CICL approached
this Court impugning the aforesaid two orders.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
4/11
is a student and his detention is affecting his studies and
development. The petitioner was declared juvenile on
02.04.2025 by the JJB, Vaishali at Hajipur and the age of the
petitioner was 16 years and 10 months on the date of occurrence
and has got no criminal antecedent. 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 below have not
considered the fact that the petitioner has been deprived of care
and protection of his family by placing him in custody. Learned
counsel further submits that the father of the petitioner, who is
deponent in the present case, undertakes to take proper care of
the petitioner after release on bail and shall not allow him to fall
into bad company and would try to bring change in his
behaviour, if required. The social investigation report/social
background report do not make out any case to keep the CICL in
custody. The same report also mentions about his friendly nature
and normal mental condition. Learned counsel further submits
that both the courts below passed the orders without recording
any reason that the release of the juvenile is likely to bring him
into association with known criminals or expose him to any
moral, physical or psychological danger. For his proper physical
and mental development, he needs to be enlarged on bail as his
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
5/11
continuous custody would be detrimental to his mental and
physical well being. There is no chance of CICL falling in bad
company and he is the first offender and is 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.
7. Learned APP for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant/opposite party no. 2 opposes the
submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel
for the opposite party no. 2 submits that the petitioner himself
took away the brother of the informant and assaulted him along
with other co-accused persons. Learned counsel further submits
that the offence of the CICL is serious. Learned counsel further
submits that in the social investigation report/social background
report, it has also come that there was lack of interest in
education and has failed in matriculation examination and there
is lack of discipline in the family. If the CICL is enlarged on
bail, there is possibility of his coming into association of band
elements of society.
8. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submission of the parties.
9. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
6/11
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
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
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
7/11
seven days of the bail order, such child shall
be produced before the Board for modification
of the conditions of bail.”
10. 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 not be denied to a CICL.
11. 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 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
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
8/11
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.
(xiv)...
(xv)…
(xvi)...”
12. Cumulative reading of these two provisions show
the CICL shall be released on bail unless the fact comes on
record that there was chance of such child coming in contact
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
9/11
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.
13. In the facts of the present case, the alleged offence
is 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 01.02.2025 and perusal of the impugned orders show the
bail was denied on the ground that release of the child in
conflict with law would be against the best interest of the child
and there is possibility of his coming into association of bad
elements of society. Further, from the record as well as social
investigation report/social background report of the CICL, 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 and to protect the best interest of the
child, the best place could be the house of the child. Therefore,
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
10/11
the conclusions arrived at by the learned Juvenile Justice Board,
Vaishali at Hajipur as well as learned 1st Additional Sessions
Judge-cum-Special Judge, Children Court, Vaishali at Hajipur
are not sustainable in the given facts and circumstances of the
case.
14. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of
the considered opinion that the child in conflict with law could
be released on bail. Let the petitioner, a child in conflict with
law, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Juvenile
Justice Board, Vaishali at Hajipur/concerned court in connection
with J.J.B. Case No. 44 of 2025 arising out of Rajapakar PS
Case No. 39 of 2025, 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
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.
15. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed and
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.645 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
11/11
the judgment/order dated 18.06.2025 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (Children Court),
Vaishali in Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No. 11 of 2025, as well
as order dated 24.04.2025 passed by learned Juvenile Justice
Board, Vaishali at Hajipur in JJB Case No. 44 of 2025 arising
out of Rajapakar PS Case No. 39 of 2025, are hereby set aside.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T
Checking your session…