Patna High Court
Abhinav Kumar @ Abhinash Kumar @ Abnash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Bail of the juvenile petitioner cannot be granted as its release would defeat the ends of justice.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Kumar, a 17‑year‑old at the time of the alleged incident, was accused of participating in the gang‑rape of a 16‑year‑old girl. The Juvenile Justice Board denied his bail application under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, a decision affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner appealed, arguing that bail could not be refused absent a specific risk of association with criminals or moral danger, citing earlier decisions. The High Court examined the seriousness of the offence, the victim’s testimony, medical evidence, and the statutory grounds for refusing bail, concluding that releasing the petitioner would defeat the ends of justice and pose moral and physical danger. Consequently, the revision was dismissed and the bail denial upheld.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to a juvenile offender aged 17 in a gang‑rape case under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
- Whether the statutory grounds for refusing bail – association with known criminals, exposure to moral/physical/psychological danger, or defeat of the ends of justice – are satisfied in the present facts.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 161, 164
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12, 12(1)
Subjects
- bail
- juvenile justice
- gang rape
- Section 12
- juvenile offender
- criminal revision
- ends of justice
- moral danger
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.673 of 2025
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3911 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2023 Thana- BALIGAON District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sumit Kumar, s/o Bhola Paswan, resident of village- Khoajpur, P.S.-
Baligaon, District- Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Indu Sinha W/O Dayanand Prasad R/O Khoajpur, P.S- Baligaon, Distt.-
Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Krishna Prabhat, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
10 17-03-2026 1-This Criminal Revision under Section 102 of the
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in
short ‘the JJ Act’) has been preferred by the petitioner against
the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I-cum-Presiding Officer, Children Court,
Vaishali at Hajipur in Criminal Appeal No.18 of 2023, affirming
the order passed by the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile
Justice Board, Vaishali, in connection with Baligaon Case
No.62/2023, District- Vaishali at Hajipur, whereby prayer for
bail of the petitioner has been rejected.
2-Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.673 of 2025(10) dt.17-03-2026
2/9
Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State of Bihar and
perused the record.
3-Brief facts of the case, which are required to be stated
are that the informant, who is grandmother of the victim got a
First Information Report lodged on 02.06.2023 at around 02:10
PM against five named persons stating inter-alia that on
01.06.2023 at about 09:10 pm she went to sleep at home and her
three grand-daughters were at home and they were chatting with
each other. After sometime she heard someone crying, which
woke her up. When she woke up, she saw her grand-daughter
(herein after referred to as ‘victim’), aged about 16 years sitting
in the next room crying. When she asked her why she was
crying, victim told her that she was going to bathroom at night
and the main gate made of filth was rattling. As soon as she
opened the door, five boys dragged her towards the gachhi and
raped her one by one. Thereafter they forced her to swallow a
phenyl tablet. She cried and said that she would not survive. She
observed that her salwar was heavily stained with blood. The
victim also disclosed that she identified all the five accused as:
(1) Sumit Kumar, son of Bhola Paswan; (2) Neeraj Kumar, son
of Lakhendra Paswan; (3) Avinash Kumar, son of Ashok
Paswan; (4) Sushin Paswan, son of Shambhu Paswan, who are
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.673 of 2025(10) dt.17-03-2026
3/9
resident of Khawajpur and (5) Rahul Kumar (alias Dhauli) son
of Phalel Sahni, who is resident of Kuriya. Then She lost
consciousness. With the help of villagers she was admitted to
Patepur PHC, from where she was referred to Sadar Hospital,
Hajipur, where she remained unconscious and under treatment.
4-The petitioner was arrested and produced before the
Juvenile Justice Board. An application under Section 12 of the
Act has been filed before the Juvenile Justice Board for grant of
bail to the petitioner. The learned Juvenile Justice Board
rejected the bail application of the petitioner.
5-Being aggrieved thereof, an appeal was preferred before
the appellate Court, but the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-
cum-Presiding Officer, Children Court, Vaishali at Hajipur
affirmed the order of the Juvenile Justice Board and dismissed
the appeal. Hence, this revision.
6-Learned counsel for the petitioner, assailing the
impugned orders, submits that the petitioner was a juvenile on
the date of the alleged incident dated 01.06.2023 and he has
been declared juvenile by the Juvenile Justice Board treating his
age as 17 years on the date of alleged incident. The petitioner
has remained confined in juvenile home since 03.06.2023, who
has no criminal history. Learned counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.673 of 2025(10) dt.17-03-2026
4/9
further relying upon the judgments of the co-ordinate Bench of
this Court in the matters of Shashi Kumar vs. The State of Bihar
passed in Criminal Revision No.341 of 2023 and Juvenile “X”
vs. The State of Bihar passed in Criminal Revision No.613 of
2023 and analogous cases, submits that on ground of
seriousness or heinousness of the offence, the bail application of
juvenile cannot be rejected. The bail application of a juvenile
can only be refused if there appears to be a reasonable ground
for believing that his release is likely to bring him into
association with any known criminals or expose him to moral
danger. In the present case there is no material on record for
believing that the release of petitioner is likely to bring him into
association with any known criminal or expose him to moral,
psychological danger, therefore, aforesaid impugned orders are
not sustainable and liable to be set aside and petitioner is
entitled to be released on bail in view of Section 12 of Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Child) Act, 2015.
7-Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the
prayer for bail of the petitioner reiterating the prosecution case
as mentioned in F.I.R.. It is also pointed out that victim in her
statement recorded before the trial Court has supported the
prosecution case making allegation of rape on her against the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.673 of 2025(10) dt.17-03-2026
5/9
accused persons of this case. Much emphasis has been given by
contending that the petitioner is a person of hardened criminal
mind and is also an imminent danger to the public at large.
There is reasonable apprehension that if the petitioner is
released on bail, there is every likelihood that he may be
exposed to moral or psychological danger to the victim. The bail
sought for has been rightly refused in view of Section 12(1) of
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Child) Act, 2015.
8-Admittedly, on the date of incident, the age of petitioner
was 17 years. A juvenile offender who is above 16 years of age
and below 18 years of age is not entitled as of right to be
enlarged on bail.
9-The Court has to see whether the opinion of the learned
appellate Court as well as Juvenile Justice Board recorded in the
impugned judgment and orders are in consonance with the
provision of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Section 12 of the aforesaid
Act lays down three contingencies in which bail could be
refused to juvenile. They are:-
(i) if the release is likely to bring him into association with any
known criminal, or
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.673 of 2025(10) dt.17-03-2026
6/9
(ii) expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger, or
(iii) that his release would defeat the ends of justice.
10-Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the record, this Court finds that:-
10.1-It is a case of gang rape on minor child (victim) by
five boys.
10.2-F.I.R. was promptly lodged by the informant on the
narration of incident by the victim.
10.3-The victim during investigation in her statement
under section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. as well as in her
statement recorded before the trial Court has supported the
prosecution case giving vivid description of the incident making
allegation of gang rape against all the five accused persons
including the petitioner.
10.4-In the medical examination report of the victim,
abrasions were wound on her body. Bleeding was present on her
private part and her hymen was found freshly torn. In the
opinion of doctor victim was given some poison, which prima-
facie support the prosecution case.
10.5-Till date 5 prosecution witnesses including the
victim, out of 12 prosecution witnesses have been examined
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.673 of 2025(10) dt.17-03-2026
7/9
before the trial Court and trial of the petitioner is proceeding.
11-This Court is of the view that gang rape is the most
heinous, hated, morally and physically reprehensible crime in a
society, as it is an assault on the body, mind and privacy of the
helpless victim. It also shakes the spirit and very core of the life
of the victim and leaves a permanent scar on her life.
12-The trial of the petitioner is going on as an adult,
therefore, in view of the legal position applicable to the present
case, in case of conviction of the petitioner, he can be sentenced
for more than three years' except life or death. In case, the
petitioner is released on bail, there is a strong possibility of his
being in danger morally, physically or psychologically and he
may again get involved in criminal activities.
13-In the matter of bail of juvenile, the Court has to see
literally through a prism having three angles, i.e. firstly, the
angle of welfare and betterment of the child itself, secondly, the
demands of justice to the victim and her family and thirdly, the
concerns of society at large.
14-The further details relating to the incident need not be
referred to herein since the allegations of the prosecution and
the defence thereto is still open to be urged by the parties in the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.673 of 2025(10) dt.17-03-2026
8/9
trial Court.
15-So far as both the aforesaid judgments relied upon on
behalf the petitioner is concerned, this Court is of the view that
it is well settled that every case turns on its own facts. Even one
additional or different fact may make a big difference between
the conclusion in two cases, because even a single significant
detail may alter the entire aspect. The said judgements are
distinguishable on the facts, hence same are not helpful to the
petitioner.
16-Under the facts and circumstances of the case, in case
petitioner is released on bail, then his release would defeat the
ends of justice.
17-In view of the above, the findings recorded by the
learned Courts below are not erroneous and cannot be said to be
unsustainable. The aforesaid impugned orders are not liable to
be interfered with, which are wholly impeccable.
18-As a fall out and consequence of the above, the
present Criminal Revision lacks merit, and is accordingly,
rejected.
19-However, it is made clear that the observations
contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.673 of 2025(10) dt.17-03-2026
9/9
and shall not effect the merit of the trial.
20-Taking into the consideration the nature of the offence
and stage of trial, it would be appropriate that the trial of the
petitioner be concluded at earliest. Accordingly, trial Court shall
make all efforts to conclude the trial as expeditiously as
possible.
(Sanjay Kumar Singh , J)
Raj Ranjan/-
U T
Checking your session…