IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.541 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-284 Year-2024 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran ======================================================

XXXXX ... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Shashi Ranjan S/o Manoj Singh R/o Village - Mura, P.S - Garkha, District -

Saran ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate For the State : Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. However, there is no representation on behalf of opposite party no. 2 despite valid service of notice. 2. From perusal of record, it transpires that in the revision petition, the identity details of the Juvenile is being disclosed, which is against the statutory provisions prescribed under Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 which mandates protection of disclosure of identity of the juvenile in conflict with law. Therefore, the identity of the petitioner is being referred to in the cause title as XXXX.

3. Registry while uploading the order on the website shall also ensure that the cause title is reflected in similar manner.

4. The instant revision petition has been filed for setting aside the Judgment dated 21.02.2025 passed by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Children Court, Saran at Chapra in Criminal (Juvenile) Appeal No. 16 of 2024 whereby and whereunder the learned Children Court dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and also to set aside the order dated 30.10.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Saran at Chapra rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for bail in connection with Juvenile Enquiry No. 1070 of 2024, arising out of Garkha P.S. Case No. 284 of 2024 for the offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner approached this Court impugning the aforesaid two orders.

5. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that Garkha P.S.

Case No. 284 of 2024 has been registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of written report of informant Shashi Ranjan. In the written report, the informant stated that while he has been returning home with Rs.4,10,000/- in course of his business of consumer service, three miscreants on a bike assaulted him on gunpoint and snatched bag containing the cash, mobile phone and key of his shop and fled away from the spot. The name of the petitioner transpired during investigation for being in the said occurrence. After assessment of the age, the petitioner was declared to be a juvenile in conflict with law (in short 'CICL').

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The prayer for bail of CICL has been rejected by the learned subordinate courts on wrong appreciation of facts and circumstances without considering the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. The learned subordinate courts did not consider the fact except for confessional statement before the police, there was no material against the CICL and the confessional statement of the CICL has been recorded under duress. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the person or possession of the CICL. Learned counsel further submits that the learned Juvenile Justice Board has not considered the statutory provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. Learned counsel further submits that the bail should not have been granted on the ground that the CICL has criminal antecedent of two cases, he is school dropout and there is parental negligence. But every child should be given opportunity to reform his life and the of the CICl who is deponent before this Court undertakes to take proper care of the pe