REDACTED vs The State of Bihar

Court
Patna High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.406 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1239 Year-2025 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna
======================================================
XX S/o Sri Mritunjay Kumar. Through his father and Natural Guardian
Mritunjay Kumar who has got no adverse interest against the minor, aged
about 41 years, D/o Dasu Thakur, Resident of Mohalla- Phuyliya Tola, P.S.-
Phulwari Sharif, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. D.K. Sinha, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Abhinay Raj, Advocate
Mr. Alexander Ashok, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Nagendra Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Sushrut Shekhar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 01-09-2026
Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner as
well as learned APP for the State.
2. The instant criminal revision petition is directed
against the order dated 26.03.2026 passed by the learned
District and Additional Session Judge-I-cum-Children Court,
Patna in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 2026, whereby and
whereunder the appeal has been dismissed and the order of
learned Juvenile Justice Board, Patna dated 03.01.2026 passed
in JJB Case No. 1129 of 2025, arising out of Phulwari Sharif
P.S. Case No. 1239 of 2025 for offences punishable under

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.406 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
2/9
Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023,
refusing prayer for bail, has been affirmed.
3. Briefly stated facts of the case as it appears from
record, are that, one Lalan Kumar Gupta submitted fardbeyan
on 31.07.2025 to Janipur Police Station alleging that when his
wife Sobha Devi returned home at 02:30 PM, she found smoke
coming out from her house and the main door was open. When
the informant received this information and rushed to his house,
he found his daughter Anjali Kumari and son Ansh Kumar lying
dead on bed and crowd was assembled. The informant suspects
that some unknown person set his house on fire to conceal the
heinous act of murder of his children. During investigation, it
was revealed that the petitioner and another co-accused, namely
Raushan, were close friends of the deceased and that the
deceased used to frequently accompany them on trips. Later, the
petitioner confessed to his involvement in the commission of the
alleged offence. .
4. The learned J.J. Board, Patna vide order dated
11.12.2025 declared the petitioner to be child in conflict with
law (for brevity, “CICL”) and declared the age of the petitioner
to be 15 years, 10 months and 21 days on the date of
commission of the offence. The petitioner moved for grant of

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.406 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
3/9
bail before the learned J.J. Board, Patna. The Board rejected his
application for bail vide order dated 03.01.2026 passed in J.J.B.
Case No. 1129 of 2025.
5. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 03.01.2026
passed by the learned J.J. Board, Patna, the petitioner preferred
Cr. Appeal No. 20 of 2026 in the Court of learned District and
Additional Session Judge-I-cum-Children Court, Patna. The
Appellate Court vide order dated 26.03.2026 dismissed the
appeal and has upheld the order dated 03.01.2026 passed by the
learned J.J. Board, Patna.
6. Being aggrieved by the order dated 26.03.2026
passed by the Appellate Court in Cr. Appeal No. 20 of 2026 and
order dated 03.01.2026 passed by the learned J.J. Board, Patna,
the petitioner has moved the present revision petition before this
Court.
7. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner / CICL
submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. Learned senior counsel further
submits that orders of the learned subordinate Courts are not
sustainable. Learned senior counsel further submits that CICL is
entitled to be granted bail irrespective of the nature of offence
committed by him. The bail could be denied only on the ground

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.406 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
4/9
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. Learned senior
counsel further submits that the purpose of J.J. Act is to reform a
CICL and not to penalize him. Learned senior counsel also
submits that the 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 refusal could only be under the
exceptions under the proviso of the said provision, but none of
the conditions are present in the instant case of the petitioner.
Learned senior counsel further submits that the father of the
petitioner undertakes to take care of him and further undertakes
that he would not allow him to come in contact with bad
company. Learned senior counsel further submits that keeping
the petitioner in protective custody would not serve any useful
purpose and it would not be for betterment of the petitioner or
his moral, physical or psychological well-being. Learned senior
counsel lastly submits that petitioner is having clean antecedent
and is in observation home / jail custody since 02.08.2025.
8. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes
the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner / CICL and
submits that the petitioner was in close touch with the deceased

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.406 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
5/9
girl and used to frequent her house, but later on the deceased
blocked him on Instagram and stopped talking with him. The
villagers have also informed that the petitioner is a delinquent
and spends most of the time with friends. Learned APP further
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 APP further submits that returning the
petitioner to his family and restoring his family life could not be
in his best interest and keeping him in the observation home
might protect the petitioner from coming in contact with bad
company.
9. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submissions advanced by the parties and perused the
record.
10. Section 12 of the 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
psychological well being of the CICL or the release would
defeat the ends of justice. If these grounds are not present, the

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.406 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
6/9
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
interest.
12. Cumulative reading of aforesaid provisions

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.406 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
7/9
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, I do not find any material on record to
show that the petitioner / CICL will come into contact with any
known criminal or that the petitioner is having no guardianship.
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 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

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.406 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
8/9
respective orders. Therefore, the orders impugned cannot be
sustained
14. Accordingly, the order of the Appellate Court
dated 26.03.2026 passed by the learned District and Additional
Session Judge-I-cum-Children Court, Patna, in Criminal Appeal
No. 20 of 2026 is set aside. Consequently, the order of the
learned J.J. Board, Patna in JJB Case No. 1129 of 2025, arising
out of Phulwari Sharif P.S. Case No. 1239 of 2025 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, Patna / concerned Court in connection with JJB Case No.
1129 of 2025, arising out of Phulwari Sharif P.S. Case No. 1239
of 2025, 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
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

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.406 of 2026 dt.01-09-2026
9/9
Board on each and every date of trial of the case fixed by the
Board.
(iii) The petitioner shall fully cooperate in the trial
and in the case of his non-cooperation, the learned J.J. Board
will be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
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