The interests of the child must be prioritized in bail decisions, underlining the presumption of innocence for juveniles.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 15-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/child in conflict with law, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

02. The petitioner/juvenile is a child in conflict with law (in short ‘CICL’) and the instant revision petition is preferred on behalf of the petitioner for setting aside the impugned Judgment/Order dated 17.05.2025 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children Court, Saran at Chapra, in Criminal(Juvenile)Appeal No. 15 of 2025 whereby and whereunder the learned appellate court rejected the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the order dated 03.01.2025 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Saran at Chapra in JJB No. 983 of

2024 arising out of Muffasil P.S. Case No. 170 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 302 of Indian Penal Code whereby and whereunder the learned J.J.Board, Saran at Chapra rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

03. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the informant recorded his fardbayan before the police official on 26.03.2024 wherein he stated that his son went on his motorcycle to play Holi and subsequently his dead body was found near a bridge and there was a deep injury on the back side of his head. The informant alleged that the petitioner, in the background of earlier dispute, stabbed him to death and fled away with his mobile. On the basis of the fardbayan of the informant, Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 170 of 2024 has been registered. Subsequently on 27.11.2024, the age of the petitioner was assessed by the learned J.J.Board to be 13 years 05 months and 06 days on the date of occurrence. The prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by the learned J.J.Board, Saran at Chapra and thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the learned First Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Children Court, Saran at Chapra but the said appeal was also rejected on 17.05.2025 affirming the order passed by the learned J.J.Board, Saran at Chapra.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner/CICL submits that the orders of the learned courts below are against the law as well as the facts existing on record. The age of the CICL was assessed to be 13 years, 5 months and 06 days and it shows the petitioner was only a child on the date of occurrence. Learned counsel further submits that the whole case against the CICL is based on suspicion and no material has come up on record to show the complicity of the CICL in the alleged occurrence. The FIR has been lodged after a delay of one day. Learned counsel further submits that prior to recording his fardbayan, the informant or his son have not made any complaint against this petitioner. Furthermore, the case of the informant gets demolished as post mortem report shows no injury was found on the head/body by knife and only an external injury which is a lacerated wound on the occipital region was found. Therefore, the post mortem report does not support the prosecution case. Learned counsel further submits that the post mortem report is silent on the cause of death and viscera was preserved for chemical analysis. Moreover, nothing incriminating has been recovered from the person or possession of the CICL. The son of the informant was a habitual criminal and a drunkard. On the day of Holi, he had been driving his motorcycle under the influence of alcohol without wearing a helmet. As a result, when he fell down, he sustained injury on his head and subsequently died. Learned counsel further submits that the orders of the learned J.J. Board as well as learned appellate court are illegal. The prayer for bail of the CICL has been rejected by a cursory order passed by the learned courts below in an arbitrary manner. The learned subordinate courts did not appreciate the report of the District Probation Officer, Social Background Report and Social Investigation Report in its right perspect