Patna High Court
Chandan Kumar Paswan vs The State Of Bihar on 8 July, 2025
Author: Jitendra Kumar
Bench: Jitendra Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3293 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-242 Year-2023 Thana- MADHEPUR District- Madhubani
======================================================
Chandan Kumar Paswan, S/O Dukhan Paswan, R/O Village- Madhepur, P.S-
Madhepur, Distt.- Madhubani under natural guardianship of Jibachhi Devi
W/O Dukhan Paswan, R/O Village- Madhepur, P.S- Madhepur, Distt.-
Madhubani, (Mother on behalf of the Appellant).
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Sheikh Arkan Ahmad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 08-07-2025
The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant
against the impugned order dated 22.05.2024 passed by learned
Additional Sessions Judge-Ist.-cum-Special Judge, Children
Court, Madhubani, in E. N. No. 1470 of 2023, arising out of
Madhepur P.S. Case No. 242 of 2023, whereby learned Children
Court has rejected the application of the appellant for releasing
him on bail.
2. The appellant has been lodged in Observation
Home for about one year and seven months since 05.10.2023.
3. Madhepura P.S. Case No. 242 of 2023 has been
registered against unknown 4-5 persons for offences punishable
under Sections 341, 323, 302, 363, 364, 201 read with Section
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
2/14
34 of the Indian Penal Code on written report of one Runa Devi
regarding death of her husband, Guddu Jha.
4. As per the written report dated 29.09.2023, Guddu
Jha was missing since morning and despite search, the
informant could not get any clue about his whereabout. But she
came to know as per hearsay that he was beaten by 4-5 persons
in Pasikhana (place of taking tari, a type of intoxicant made of
palm juice) at about 8-10 am.
5. Subsequent to the lodging of the F.I.R., the dead
body of Guddu Jha was found in Sanath Jha’s pond. The pond
was filled up with water. As per the post-mortem report, death
of Guddu Jha was caused by drowning.
6. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was
submitted against four persons including the appellant for
offences punishable under Sections 364, 302, 201 read with
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
7. Subsequently, vide order dated 20.12.2023, the
appellant was found to be 17 years, 5 months and 24 days old
and was declared juvenile. As per preliminary assessment vide
order dated 03.04.2024, he was found to be adult and his case
was transferred from Juvenile Justice Board to Children Court,
where the appellant filed bail petition, but the same was rejected
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
3/14
by the impugned order.
8. I heard learned counsel for the appellant and
learned APP for the State.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and falsely implicated in this case. There is
no material at all to show any complicity of the appellant in the
alleged offence. The whole case, as per the police report, against
the appellant is based on suspicion and hearsay. The F.I.R. was
lodged against unknown. The appellant was not named in the
F.I.R. and no evidence worth the name has been collected by the
police during investigation showing his complicity in the
alleged offence.
10. He further submits that learned Children Court has
rejected the bail application of the Appellant not only on
irrelevant consideration but even on a wrong fact. As per the
impugned order, the Appellant, as per Social Investigation
Report, has a habit of intoxication, whereas there is no such
reference in the Social Investigation Report. Moreover, heinous
nature of the alleged offence is no ground for rejecting the bail
application of a juvenile, irrespective of his age but one of the
grounds given by learned Children Court to reject the bail of the
Appellant is serious nature of the alleged offence.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
4/14
11. He further submits that the impugned order is not
in consonance with the object of the Juvenile Justice Act, which
intends not to punish the child in conflict with law but to reform
and rehabilitate him so that the child could be reintegrated with
the society and he could become its productive member.
12. He also submits that family of the child inflict
with law has been contemplated as the best and first desirable
institution to achieve the object of the Act and
institutionalization of a juvenile in conflict with law is a last
resort under the J.J. Act, and hence, every child in conflict with
law has right to be united with his family at the earliest.
13. Hence, as per the submission of learned counsel
for the Appellant, the impugned order is liable to be set aside
releasing the Appellant on bail allowing the appeal.
14. However, learned APP for the State defends the
impugned order submitting that there is no illegality or infirmity
in the same and present appeal is accordingly liable to be
dismissed.
15. Before I consider the rival submissions of the
parties, I deem it proper to refer to Section 12 of the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which deals
with bail to juveniles. Section 12 of the Act reads as follows:
“12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
5/14alleged 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 person’s 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 subsection (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 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.”
(Emphasis Supplied)
16. From perusal of Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015, it
clearly emerges that Section 12 of the Act overrides the bail
provisions as contained in the Criminal Procedure Act, 1973 or
any other law for time being in force. It further emerges that as
per Section 12 of the Act, bail to the Juvenile is a rule and
refusal of the same is an exception and Juvenile can be denied
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
6/14
bail only on the following three grounds: (i) if there appears
reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to
bring that person into association with any known criminal, or,
(ii) expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological
danger, or, (iii) the person’s release would defeat the ends of
justice.
17. It also emerges that seriousness of the alleged
offence or the age of the juvenile are also no relevant
considerations for denial of bail under Section 12 of the J.J. Act.
Even the child who is 16 years or above 16 years of age and is
alleged to have committed a heinous offence is also entitled to
get bail under Section 12 of the Act, 2015. There is no
classification, whatsoever, provided in Section 12 of the Act,
2015 in regard to grant of bail. Section 12 is applicable to all
juveniles in conflict with law without any discrimination of any
nature. (Also refer to Lalu Kumar @ Lal Babu Vs. State of
Bihar, 2019 (6) BLJ 2016).
18. Here, it would be also pertinent to point out that
the ends of justice as used in the proviso to Section 12(1) of the
J.J. Act is drastically different to one as used in the context of
penal statutes. The ends of justice in the context of any Act is
ascertained on the basis of the purpose and object of that Act
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
7/14
and the objective of the J.J. Act is to reform and rehabilitate the
juveniles and not to punish them, as emerges from the preamble
to the J.J. Act, which reads as follows:
“An Act to consolidate and amend the law
relating to children alleged and found to be in conflict
with law and children in need of care and protection by
catering to their basic needs through proper care,
protection, development, treatment, social reintegration,
by adopting a child-friendly approach in the adjudication
and disposal of matters in the best interest of children and
for their rehabilitation through processes provided, and
institutions and bodies established, hereinunder and for
matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”
(Emphasis Supplied)
19. The purpose and object of the J.J. Act manifests
in Section 3 also of the J.J. Act, providing for general principles
to be followed in the administration of the Act. Section 3 of the
Act reads as follows:
“3. General principles to be followed in administration
of Act. The Central Government, the State Governments,
the Board, and other agencies, as the case may be, while
implementing the provisions of this Act shall be guided by
the following fundamental principles, namely:–
…………………………………………………………
(iv) Principle of best interest: 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.
……………………………………………………………
(vi) Principle of safety: All measures shall be taken to
ensure that the child is safe and is not subjected to any
harm, abuse or maltreatment while in contact with the care
and protection system, and thereafter.
(vii) Positive measures: All resources are to be mobilised
including those of family and community, for promoting
the well-being, facilitating development of identity and
providing an inclusive and enabling environment, to
reduce vulnerabilities of children and the need for
intervention under this Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
8/14
(viii) Principle of non-stigmatising semantics: Adversarial
or accusatory words are not to be used in the processes
pertaining to a child.”
(Emphasis supplied)
20. The J.J. Act is based on the belief that children are
the future of the society and in case they go into conflict with
law under some circumstances, they should be reformed and
rehabilitated and not punished. No society can afford to punish
its children. Punitive approach towards children in conflict with
law would be self-destructive for the society.
21. As such, if the keeping of the child in custody is
helpful in his development and rehabilitation or protection, only
then it could be said that release of the child would defeat the
ends of justice. (Also refer to Abhishek Vs. State, 205 CriLJ
(NOC) 115 (Delhi) and Manoj Vs. State (NCT of Delhi, 2006
CriLJ 4759).
22. It also emerges from Section 3 of the Act that
Reformatory or Observation Home is only one of the measures
contemplated by our legislature for reforming and rehabilitating
the delinquent children. However, the family of the child in
conflict with law has been considered by the legislature as the
best and first desirable institution to achieve the object of the
Act. Hence, the primary responsibility of care and protection of
the child has been given to the biological family or adoptive or
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
9/14
foster parents of the child and it has been contemplated that
every child in conflict with law has right to be reunited with his
family at the earliest. Institutionalization of a juvenile in conflict
with law has been contemplated as the last resort. Such
principles manifest in clauses v, xii and xiii of Section 3 of the
Act which read as follows:
“3. General principles to be followed in administration
of Act. The Central Government, the State Governments,
the Board, and other agencies, as the case may be, while
implementing the provisions of this Act shall be guided by
the following fundamental principles, namely:–
…………………………………………………………
(v) Principle of family responsibility: The primary
responsibility of care, nurture and protection of the child
shall be that of the biological family or adoptive or foster
parents, as the case may be.
………………………………………………………….
(xii) Principle of institutionalisation as a measure of last
resort: A child shall be placed in institutional care as a step
of last resort after making a reasonable inquiry.
(xiii) Principle of repatriation and restoration: 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.”
(Emphasis Supplied)
23. As such, Section 12 of the J.J. Act is in
consonance with the purpose and object of the Act, providing
for mandatory bail to a juvenile in conflict with law unless the
grounds as provided in the proviso to Section 12(1) of the Act
is/are present, so that the child is re-united with his family at the
earliest opportunity and the protection, development,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
10/14
reformation and rehabilitation of the child is ensured.
24. Hence, under the J.J. Act, 2015, a child in conflict
with law is not expected to be treated as an adult offender. J.J.
Boards/Courts are required to adopt fundamentally a different
approach while dealing with juveniles in conflict with law. They
are expected to deal with such juveniles with all sensibility and
responsibility, keeping in mind the purpose and object of the J.J.
Act to reform and rehabilitate the child, so as to make him a
responsible and productive member of the society. The society
would get ruined if such children are dealt with punitive
approach.
25. Now coming to the case on hand, I find that
learned Children Court has rejected the bail application of the
appellant on the following two grounds:
(i) The appellant, as per Social Investigation Report,
has habit of intoxication.
(ii) The nature of the alleged offence against the
appellant is serious in nature.
26. However, I find that no ground for denial of the
bail is sustainable as per the facts of the case and relevant laws.
After perusal of the Social Investigation Report, I find that there
is no reference to the habit of the Appellant of intoxication.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
11/14
Moreover, as per law, serious nature of the alleged offence is not
a ground for denying the bail to a juvenile in conflict with law.
27. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case,
the Appellant should have been enlarged on bail in his best
interest. From the perusal of the Social Investigation Report, I
find that the Appellant belongs to a poor family and works as a
labourer along with his brother to sustain himself and his family
members. He has also dropped out from Class-V of school on
account of his poverty. He has neither home, nor land. He lives
in a rented house. He belongs to a Scheduled Caste Community.
Neither he nor his family members has any criminal antecedent.
He bears a good conduct and is not a criminal and the death of
the deceased, Guddu Jha has been caused on account of his
falling down in the pond filled with water. As per further report
the deceased had consumed tari, (a type of intoxicant) on the
date of occurrence and he had fallen down in the pond filled
with water. Even from perusal of the case diary, it transpires
that there is no cogent material in the case diary to show any
role of the appellant in causing death of Guddu Jha. Except
hearsay, there is no evidence worth the name against the
appellant, nor was he named in the F.I.R.
28. Under such facts and circumstances, there was no
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
12/14
reason to deny bail to the Appellant. He should have been
released on bail and the District Administration might have been
directed to help the Appellant as per Government Welfare
Schemes to tide over his poverty, so that he could have at least
resumed his education or at least could have got vocational
training. As the appellant belongs to a Scheduled Caste
Community, the District Administration could have been also
directed to see whether it could provide home for him under
Government Scheme. But instead of taking such measures in
consonance with object of the J.J. Act, learned Children Court
has acted irresponsibly by passing the impugned order. Instead
of rehabilitating the juvenile, he has further devastated his life.
This is not expected of a Court acting under the scheme of the
29. Hence, the impugned order is not sustainable in
the eye of law. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside,
allowing the present appeal, directing the appellant to be
released on bail subject to furnishing the bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- by his mother and undertaking by her by way of an
affidavit that the appellant would not come in contact with any
criminal and he would re-start his education through vocational
school or otherwise and his developmental needs would be
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
13/14
taken care of, and he would attend the J.J. Board and Courts as
and when required or directed.
30. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
learned Secretary District Legal Services Authority, Madhubani,
is also directed to conduct an inquiry whether the Appellant has
ration card or not and if he does not posses any such card, he
should take steps to ensure that he gets ration card. He is also
directed to enquire whether the Appellant is getting grains from
the Public Distribution System as per Government Scheme, and
if he is not getting such grains from the PDS, he must ensure
that the Appellant gets such grains. He should also enquire
whether the Appellant is entitled to get his home constructed by
the District Administration, as per Government Scheme and if
he is eligible for such home, he should also take steps to ensure
that he gets such home. He is also directed to get admission of
the Appellant in a local vocational training school.
31. The District Magistrate, Madhubani, is also
directed to co-operate and collaborate with learned Secretary,
District Legal Services Authority, Madhubani, in the aforeasid
measures.
32. The Lower Court Records be sent back to the
Court concerned, forthwith along with a copy of this order.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3293 of 2024 dt.08-07-2025
14/14
33. Let a copy of this order be also sent to learned
Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Madhubani and
District Magistrate, Madhubani, for their information and
needful.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.)
ravishankar/-
AFR/NAFR AFR CAV DATE N.A. Uploading Date 12.07.2025 Transmission Date 12.07.2025