REDACTED vs The State of Bihar

Court
Patna High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.495 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-804 Year-2024 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran
======================================================
x S/o y Under guardianship of his father Madan Choudhary Son of Shankar
Choudhary, R/o Village- Bila Mohammadpur, P.S - Dariyapur, District -
Saran.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ajay Rai S/o Late Bhawan Rai, R/o Village- Sabalpur Hasti Tola, P.S.-
Sonpur, Distt.- Saran.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Kumar Palit, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP
For the OP No. 2 : Mr. Anant Kumar Bhashkar, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 01-09-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the OP No. 2 as well as learned APP for the State.
2. The instant criminal revision petition is directed
st
against the judgment dated 17.03.2026 passed by the learned 1
Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children Court, Saran at
Chapra, in Criminal Juvenile Appeal No. 38 of 2025, whereby
and whereunder the appeal has been dismissed and the order of
learned Juvenile Justice Board, Saran at Chapra dated
07.05.2025 passed in JJB Case No. 1194 of 2024, arising out of
Sonpur P.S. Case No. 804 of 2024 for offences punishable under
Sections 137(2), 103(1), 61(2), 111 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.,

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.495 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
2/9
2023, refusing prayer for bail, has been affirmed.
3. Briefly stated facts of the case as it appears from
record, are that, the OP No. 2 lodged a case vide Sonpur P.S.
Case No. 804 of 2024 under Section 137(2) of the B.N.S., 2023
alleging that on 25.09.2024 at about 02:00 PM, the son of OP
No. 2 left his home after receiving a phone call, but he did not
return. Thereafter, at about 09:00 PM, the OP No. 2 again talked
with him and during the call, his son told him that he would
return in an hour, but afterwards he became traceless. During
investigation, the dead body of the son of the O.P. No. 2 was
found near a river and the name of the petitioner transpired
during investigation on the basis of the confessional statement
of co-accused persons. Later on, vide order dated 30.09.2024,
Sections 103 (1), 61(2), 111, 3(5) B.N.S. were added.
4. The learned J.J. Board, Saran at Chapra declared
the petitioner to be child in conflict with law (for brevity,
“CICL”) vide order dated 04.02.2025. The Medical Board as per
report dated 18.12.2024 has assessed the age of the CICL to be
below 17 years. The petitioner moved for grant of bail before
the learned J.J. Board, Saran at Chapra. The Board rejected his
application for bail vide order dated 07.05.2025 passed in J.J.B.
Case No. 1194 of 2024.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.495 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
3/9
5. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 07.05.2025
passed by the learned J.J. Board, Saran at Chapra, the petitioner
preferred Cr. Juvenile Appeal No. 38 of 2025 in the Court of
st
learned 1 Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children Court,
Saran at Chapra. The Appellate Court vide judgment dated
17.03.2026 dismissed the appeal and has upheld the order dated
07.05.2025 passed by the learned J.J. Board, Saran at Chapra.
6. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated
17.03.2026 passed by the Appellate Court in Cr. Juvenile Appeal
No. 38 of 2025 and order dated 07.05.2025 passed by the
learned J.J. Board, Saran at Chapra, the petitioner has moved the
present revision petition before this Court.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner / CICL
submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits
that both the learned Courts below acted in mechanical manner
and have not taken to consideration the mandate of law. The
name of the petitioner surfaced in the confessional statement of
the co-accused, but no specific role has been attributed to him.
The learned Courts below failed to consider the fact that
petitioner was not named in the FIR and nothing incriminating
has been recovered from his person or possession, so his

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.495 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
4/9
freedom would not defeat the ends of justice. Learned counsel
for the petitioner submits that grant of bail is a rule under
Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 (for brevity, “the Act of 2015”) and the
CICL is entitled to be granted bail irrespective of the nature of
offence committed by him. The bail could only be denied on the
ground that his release would likely to bring him under
influence of any criminal or expose him to moral, physical or
psychological danger or would defeat the ends of justice. The
learned Courts below have passed the orders without recording
any reason that the release of the CICL is likely to bring him
into association with known criminals or expose him to any
moral, physical or psychological danger and that for his proper
physical and mental well-being he needs to be enlarged on bail
as his continuous custody would be detrimental to his physical
and mental development. Learned counsel further submits that
the purpose of the Act of 2015 is to reform a CICL and not to
penalize him. Learned counsel further submits that the father of
the CICL undertakes to take care of him and further undertakes
that he would not allow him to fall into bad company. Learned
counsel further submits that a juvenile co-accused has been
granted bail by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2026 passed in

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.495 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
5/9
Cr. Revision No. 693 of 2025 and the case of the petitioner
stands on better footing. Learned counsel lastly submits that
petitioner carries one criminal antecedent and he is in custody
since 30.09.2024.
8. Learned APP for the State as well as learned
counsel for the OP No. 2 vehemently oppose the submissions
made on behalf of the petitioner / CICL. Learned counsel for the
OP No. 2 submits that there is no infirmity in the orders of the
learned Courts below and the said orders have been passed after
due consideration of facts and law involved in the case and the
appeal of the petitioner was rejected on completely valid
ground. Learned counsel for the OP No. 2 further submits that
the petitioner has one criminal antecedent to his discredit and
his SIR and SBR does not permit him to be enlarged on bail and
grant of bail to the CICL would not be in his best interests.
9. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submissions advanced by the parties and perused the
record.
10. Section 12 of the Act of 2015 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

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.495 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
6/9
psychological well being of the CICL or the release would
defeat the ends of justice. If these grounds are not present, the
bail could not be denied to a CICL.
11. Further, the Act of 2015 is, in fact, child
friendly. The central theme is that the interest of child is
supreme. Section 3 of the Act of 2015 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 the Act of 2015 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 Act of 2015 makes it abundantly
clear that a child shall be placed in institutional care as a step of
last resort after making a reasonable inquiry. Further, Section
3(xiii) of the Section 74 of the Act of 2015 provides for
Principle of repatriation and restoration stating that a CICL shall
have the right to re-unite with his family and be restored to the
social, cultural and the economic background that he came from
unless such restoration and repartition is not in the CICL’s best

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.495 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
7/9
interest.
12. 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
CICL.
13. Coming back of the facts of the present case
and from perusal of SIR/SBR, I do not find any chance of
petitioner / CICL coming into contact with any known criminal
or that the petitioner is having no guardianship. Furthermore,
merely because the petitioner / CICL has got one criminal
antecedent, it cannot be presumed that he has become
incorrigible and is not amenable to reformatory steps. The
purpose of the Act of 2015 is the reformation of the child and
the institutionalization of a CICL is a matter of last resort and
could not be resorted to thinking that such custody would allow
to develop the mental and physical well being of the child and
psychologically make him a good citizen. This is possible only

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.495 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
8/9
under the guardianship of the parents and other family members.
Since the condition mentioned in Section 12 of the Act of 2015
for denial of bail to the petitioner is not present in the instant
case, I am of the considered opinion that the learned subordinate
courts committed error while passing their respective orders.
Therefore, the orders impugned cannot be sustained
14. Accordingly, the judgment of the Appellate
st
Court dated 17.03.2026 passed by the learned 1 Additional
Sessions Judge-cum-Children Court, Saran at Chapra, in
Criminal Juvenile Appeal No. 38 of 2025 is set aside.
Consequently, the order of the learned J.J. Board, Saran at
Chapra in JJB Case No. 1194 of 2024, arising out of Sonpur P.S.
Case No. 804 of 2024 is also set aside.
15. Let the petitioner, a child in conflict with law,
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, Saran at Chapra / concerned Court in connection with
JJB Case No. 1194 of 2024, arising out of Sonpur P.S. Case No.
804 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be the parents of the
petitioner and the other bailor will also be relative of the

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.495 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
9/9
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.
16. Accordingly, the present revision petition is
allowed.
17. The office is directed to send back the LCR to
the court concerned forthwith, if any.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Shahnawaz/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 03.09.2026
Transmission Date 03.09.2026