### SECTION 12 OF JJ ACT MANDATES BAIL UNLESS SPECIFIC PROVISOS ARE SUBSTANTIATED BY MATERIAL EVIDENCE.

The Petitioner, a Child in Conflict with Law (CICL) aged approximately 12 years and 4 months, was accused of establishing a physical relationship with a minor under the inducement of marriage, resulting in pregnancy.

Following his apprehension on 23.05.2025, the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Board, Araria, and subsequently the Children’s Court, Araria (on 14.07.2025), denied his bail application.

The Petitioner challenged these orders, contending that the Courts failed to consider the Social Investigation Report (SIR) properly and that his father had undertaken full responsibility for his supervision.

The State and Informant opposed bail, citing the gravity of the offence and potential danger to the victim.

1. Whether the identity of a CICL can be disclosed in court records under the Juvenile Justice Act.

2. Whether the lower courts' denial of bail complied with the mandatory provisions and exceptions set out in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act, 2015, which prohibits the disclosure of a CICL's identity.

Section 12 of the JJ Act, 2015, which mandates that a juvenile "shall" be released on bail regardless of the nature of the offence, unless specific exceptions—such as association with known criminals or exposure to moral/physical danger—are proven.

Section 3(iv) of the JJ Act, emphasizing that the welfare and reformation of the child are of paramount importance.

The High Court found that the JJ Board and the Appellate Court failed to appreciate the Social Investigation Report (SIR) in its true perspective.

The Court noted that under Section 12, bail is the rule and refusal is the exception; however, such refusal must be backed by substantive material.

In this case, there was no evidence to suggest a "complete failure of guardianship" or that the CICL’s release would bring him into contact with criminals or defeat the ends of justice.

The Court observed that neither of the lower courts passed a speaking order detailing the specific circumstances required to trigger the exceptions under Section 12.

The Court allowed the revision petition, setting aside the orders of the Children’s Court and the JJ Board, and ordered the Petitioner (X1) to be released on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties, provided that one bailor is a parent who undertakes to ensure the child's proper care.

The Court further directed the Registry to ensure the CICL’s identity remains protected in website records.