Patna High Court
XXX (through his father Ajay Kumar)versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The High Court set aside the orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and the Additional Sessions Judge and directed that the child be released on bail.
Summary
The petitioners, a 14‑year‑old child in conflict with law (CICL), were accused of raping the minor daughter of an informant under Section 65(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. The Juvenile Justice Board denied bail, an order affirmed by an Additional Sessions Judge. The revision petition argued that the informant’s statements were contradictory, the Social Investigation Report was not properly considered, and that under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 bail should be granted unless the child’s release would expose him to criminal association, danger, or defeat the ends of justice. The High Court held that none of these grounds were established, emphasized the best‑interest‑of‑the‑child principle, and found the lower courts’ reliance on the Social Investigation Report unsustainable. Consequently, the Court set aside both the JJ Board and appellate orders and directed that the CICL be released on bail with specified conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be denied to a child in conflict with law under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act in the absence of grounds of criminal association, danger, or defeat of justice.
- Whether the Social Investigation Report and alleged family environment justify denial of bail for the CICL.
- Whether the orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and the Additional Sessions Judge are legally sustainable.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- child in conflict with law
- Juvenile Justice Act
- best interest of child
- observation home
- POCSO
- revision petition
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.797 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-784 Year-2024 Thana- KADAMKUAN District- Patna
======================================================
XXX (through his father Ajay Kumar) S/o- Late Mahendra Prasad Village-
Park Road Ps- Kadamkuan Dist- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Soni Kumari W/o- Arvind Rai R/o- Daldali Road Near Rampyari
Dharmshala Ps- Kadamkuan Dist- Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Chakraborty, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 22-06-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
learned APP for the State.
2. ThoughVakalatnama has been filed on behalf of
opposite party no. 2, there is no representation on behalf of
opposite party no. 2.
3. The instant criminal revision petition has been filed
for setting aside the judgment/order dated 17.05.2025 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge
Children Court, Patna in Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2025,
whereby and whereunder the learned appellate court dismissed
the appeal and upheld the order dated 05.03.2025 passed by
learned Juvenile Justice Board, Patna in JJB Case No. 1119 of
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.797 of 2025 dt.22-06-2026
2/9
2024, arising out of Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 784 of 2024
registered under Section 65(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and Section 4/6 of POCSO Act, by which the prayer for
grant of bail to the petitioner/child in conflict with law (for short
'CICL') has been rejected.
4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on the
basis of written report of informant/opposite party no. 2,
Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 784 of 2024 registered under Section
65(2) of BNS and Section 4/6 of POCSO Act. It is alleged in the
written report that the petitioner (CICL) committed rape with
the minor daughter of the informant. The age of petitioner was
assessed to be 14 years 09 months and 05 days on the date of
occurrence and, as such, he was declared juvenile by the learned
J.J. Board, Patna vide order dated 15.01.2025. The CICL moved
before the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Patna for grant of bail
but his prayer was rejected vide order dated 05.03.2025. Being
aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 05.03.2025, the
CICL preferred an appeal before the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Children Court, Patna, which also
came to be dismissed vide judgment/order dated 17.05.2025
passed by the learned appellate court. Now, being aggrieved by
the order dated 17.05.2025 passed by the learned appellate
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.797 of 2025 dt.22-06-2026
3/9
court, the CICL approached this Court by filing the instant
criminal revision petition.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner/CICL submits that the informant has made
contradictory statements in the FIR and in the restatement
recorded by the police and she changed the place of occurrence
from ‘park’ to ‘park road’. Learned counsel further submits that
the learned JJ Board as well as the learned appellate court have
not appreciated the Social Investigation Report in its right
perspective and passed the orders in casual manner without
considering the provision of law. For a CICL, grant of bail is to
be considered in positive manner. Only in case of the existence
of conditions prescribed in the proviso of Section 12 of the JJ
Act, bail could be refused. Reliance placed on the Social
Investigation Report is based on surmises and conjecture as
there is no material to show that there was any likelihood of
petitioner coming into association with any known criminal or
his release would expose him to moral, physical or
psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of
justice. The Social Investigation Report talks about lack of
control and discipline in the family, but no material has been
shown for arriving at such conclusion. Learned counsel further
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.797 of 2025 dt.22-06-2026
4/9
submits that the CICL is in observation home since 14.10.2024
and is not a previous convict. The petitioner has got no criminal
history. Learned counsel further submits that keeping the
petitioner in observation home would not serve any useful
purpose and would not help in his proper development
considering his age and it is not in the best interest of the
petitioner/CICL. Learned counsel further submits that the father
of the petitioner has given an undertaking that if the petitioner
is released on bail, he would keep him in his custody and look-
after him properly and assured on behalf of the CICL that he is
ready to cooperate with the process of law and present the
CICL/petitioner before the learned JJ Board whenever required
apart from other conditions imposed by the Court for grant of
bail. Thus, the learned counsel submits that the order dated
05.03.2025 of the learned J. J. Board, Patna as well as order
dated 17.05.2025 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-
cum-Special Judge (Children Court), Patna may be set aside.
6. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the
submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP
submits that there is no illegality in the impugned orders passed
by both the courts below. There is specific allegation against the
petitioner for commission of rape. Further, the Social
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.797 of 2025 dt.22-06-2026
5/9
Investigation Report of the Probation Officer shows family of
the petitioner is not supportive of his growth and there is lack of
control and discipline in the family. Learned APP further
submits that since there was lack of conducive environment in
the family of the CICL for his proper upbringing and the same is
against the safety of the CICL.
7. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submission of the parties and perused the record.
8. Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 provides 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 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
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.797 of 2025 dt.22-06-2026
6/9
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
[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.”
9. 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 or 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.
10. Further, the JJ Act is, in fact, child friendly. The
central theme is that the interest of child is supreme. Section 3
of the JJ Act 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
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.797 of 2025 dt.22-06-2026
7/9
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.”
11. 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 child
in conflict with law. So far as the reliance placed by the learned
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.797 of 2025 dt.22-06-2026
8/9
JJ Board as well as the learned appellate court on the Social
Investigation Report is concerned, it does not appear to be
proper as while furnishing the reason, the material on the basis
of which the report has been given about lack of control and
discipline in the family has not been discussed.
12. However, considering the fact that the Courts are
bound to see that the interest of the CICL is protected at any
cost, the CICL is in observation home since 14.10.2024 and his
best interest is paramount importance. For reformatory measures
and rehabilitation and to protect the best interest of the child, the
best place could be the house of the child and keeping such
CICL in observation home would frustrate the provision of the
J.J. Act. Therefore, the conclusions arrived at by the learned
District Courts are not sustainable and hence, the impugned
order dated 05.03.2025 passed by learned Juvenile Justice
Board, Patna in JJB Case No. 1119 of 2024 arising out of
Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 784 of 2024 and the judgment/order
dated 17.05.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (Children Court), Patna in Criminal
Appeal No.37 of 2025, are hereby set aside.
13. Let the petitioner, a child in conflict with law, be
released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.797 of 2025 dt.22-06-2026
9/9
Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice Board,
Patna/concerned court in connection with JJB Case No. 1119 of
2024 arising out of Kadamkuan P.S. Case No. 784 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
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 present revision petition is
allowed.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 23.06.2026
Transmission Date 23.06.2026
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.