Patna High Court

SUNIL KUMARversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ARUN KUMAR JHA

Holding

Bail must be granted to the child in conflict with law as none of the statutory grounds for denial under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act are met.

Summary

The petitioner, a child of approximately ten years, was accused of raping and murdering a 1 year 8 months old girl and was denied bail by the Additional Sessions Judge and the Juvenile Justice Board. The revision petition argued that the evidence was insufficient, the confession was made under duress, and that the seriousness of the alleged offences cannot be a ground to refuse bail under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The State contended that the gravity of the offences and the mental state of the child justified continued detention. The Court examined the statutory provisions, emphasizing that bail can be denied only if release would expose the child to criminal association, danger, or defeat the ends of justice, none of which were shown. It also noted the requirement under Section 74 to protect the juvenile's identity. Consequently, the Court set aside the lower courts' orders and granted bail to the child on conditions, directing the record to be returned.

Issues considered

The applicability of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 in denying bail to a child in conflict with law.
Whether the grounds for denial of bail—association with known criminals, danger to the child, or defeat of justice—are satisfied in the present case.
Whether the disclosure of the juvenile's identity violates Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12, 3(iv), 3(xii), 3(xiii), 74

Subjects

bail
juvenile justice
child in conflict with law
Section 12
Section 74
revision
high court
rape
murder
confession under duress

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 82 of 2025
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4872 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2024 Thana- MANIHARI District- Katihar
======================================================
XXXX

... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Yogesh Singh S/o- Late Shiv Pujan Singh Village- Charwaha Vidhyalay
Manihari Ps- Manihari Dist- Katihar

... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the State : Mr.Syed Ashfaque Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 10-02-2026

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as

learned APP for the State.

02. 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.

03. Registry while uploading the order on the website
Patna High Court CR. REV. No. 82 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
2/8

shall also ensure that the cause title is reflected in similar

manner.

04. The present petition has been filed for setting

aside the Judgment/Order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the

learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-1st-cum-

Children Court, Katihar passed in Cr. Appeal No. 10/2024

whereby and whereunder the order dated 06.07.2025 passed by

the learned JJ Board, Katihar rejecting the prayer for bail by the

petitioner in GR No. 1284 of 2024 in connection with Manihari

P.S. Case No. 57 of 2024 for the offences under Section 302 and

201 of the IPC has been affirmed thereby the prayer for bail of

the petitioner/child in conflict with law was rejected by both the

courts.

05. Briefly stated facts of the case is that the petitioner

took away 1 year and 8 months old daughter of the informant to

his house and committed rape with her. Thereafter the

coaccused persons, in order to destroy the evidence, throttled

the victim girl and threw her dead body in a bamboo clump.

06. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

matter was investigated by the police but no evidence of rape

was found and charge sheet has been submitted under Section

302/201 of the IPC only against the petitioner while other
Patna High Court CR. REV. No. 82 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
3/8

coaccused persons were not sent up for facing trial.

Subsequently cognizance has been taken by the learned

Additional Sessions Judge, POCSO court, Katihar. Learned

counsel further submits that petitioner was declared to be a

Child in Conflict with Law (in short ‘CICL’).

07. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

learned Subordinate Courts did not consider the facts of the case

and law applicable in the case of the petitioner for grant of bail.

The petitioner is aged only about ten years and no substantive

material has come up on record to show the involvement of the

petitioner in the alleged occurrence. The allegation of rape was

not proved. The parties are neighbours and there is enmity

between them. Except for confessional statement of the

petitioner there is no material against him. When the probation

officer has been making inquiry, in the social investigation

report it has come that the CICL stated that he was assaulted and

was forced to confess. In the second statement, it has come that

he only throttled the victim girl. Therefore there is contradictory

statement even in the social investigation report. Learned

counsel further submits that both the courts went upon the

allegation of severity of offences but under Section 12 of the

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act (in short
Patna High Court CR. REV. No. 82 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
4/8

‘JJ Act’) seriousness of allegation cannot be ground for rejection

of prayer for bail of the CICL. The prayer for bail could be

rejected only on the ground that release of the person would

likely to bring CICL 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.

None of the ingredients are present in the present case. The

father of the petitioner undertakes to take care of him and

properly guide him so that the CICL is reformed and

rehabilitated in the society. Learned counsel further submits that

the nothing has come against the release of the CICL in the

social investigation report or the social background report of the

probation officer. Learned counsel further submits that the

petitioner is in custody since 11.03.2024.

08. Learned APP for the State vehemently oppose the

submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP

submits that there is serious allegation against the petitioner that

he killed a girl aged about 1 year and 8 months after committing

rape with her. Learned APP further submits that considering the

mental status of the CICL he could not be allowed to roam free

in public.

09. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No. 82 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
5/8

rival submission of the parties.

10. At the outset, it is made clear that the gravity and

seriousness of the offences is immaterial for grant of bail to the

CICL as mandated under Section 12 of the JJ Act which 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
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
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
1[or a place of safety, as the case may be] in
such manner as may be prescribed until the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No. 82 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
6/8

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.”.

11. Therefore bail could be denied to a CICL only on

the ground that release would bring him in association with

known criminals or it will cause moral, physical and

psychological danger to the child or it would defeat the ends of

justice. Further in Section 3 of the JJ Act there are some salutary

provisions governing the well being of a CICL and foremost of

them is the presumption of innocence. Thereafter Section 3(iv)

of 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:
Patna High Court CR. REV. No. 82 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
7/8

“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.”

12. Cumulative reading of Section 12 of the JJ Act

and Section 3 of the JJ Act shows the under current flowing in

the JJ Act is regarding reformation of child. The CICL is not to

be punished rather it would be for the betterment of the society

that any such child is allowed to join the main stream and is not

stigmatized. In the present case, no material has come up on

record to show that there was chance of petitioner falling in bad

company or there was moral, physical or psychological danger

to the CICL or his release would defeat the ends of justice and

considering the interest of the child to be of paramount

importance and further considering the need for his

rehabilitation for which the best place is the family of such

child, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner/juvenile

in conflict with law be released on bail and hence is ordered to

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,
Patna High Court CR. REV. No. 82 of 2025 dt.10-02-2026
8/8

Katihar/concerned court, in connection with GR No. 1284 of

2024 in connection with Manihari P.S. Case No. 57 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 giving
undertaking that he/she shall keep proper
care and upkeep of the appellant.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain present
before the Board on each and every date of
trial of the case fixed by the Board and
shall fully co-operate in the pending
enquiry/trial.

11. Accordingly, the judgment dated 05.09.2024

passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Children

Court, Katihar and order dated 06.07.2024 passed by the learned

Juvenile Justice Board, Katihar are set aside and present

revision petition is allowed.

12. Office is directed to return the Lower Court

Record forthwith.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Anuradha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 11.02.2026
Transmission Date 11.02.2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…