PATNA, India, March 4 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on Jan. 2:

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

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 present revision petition has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner / child in conflict with law challenging the order dated 14.05.2025, passed by learned Additional District & Session Judge-I cum Special Judge (Juvenile Court), Araria, in Cr. Appeal No. 10 of 2025, arising out of Jogbani P.S. Case No. 87 of 2023, dated 06.04.2023, registered under Section 307 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, corresponding to Section 109 / 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023, affirming the order dated 23.10.2024, passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Araria, rejecting the bail of the petitioner vide JJB. No. 32 of 2024.

5. Briefly stated facts of the case leading to the institution of the present petition is that the opposite party no. 2 lodged a case vide Jogbani P.S. Case No. 87 of 2023 under Section 307 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code with the allegation that on 02.04.2023, after having dinner at around 10:30 PM, all the family members of the opposite party no. 2, including his younger brother, went to bed in their respective rooms. On 03.04.2023, at around 04:00 AM, his brother knocked on his door and when he opened the same, he found the face of his brother drenched in pool of blood. When he asked his younger brother to explain the reason for this injury, he replied that he received a call from one Md. Lal at around 03:00 AM, who asked him to come immediately to his old house situated at Indranagar, Ward No. 4. When he reached there, he found three FIR named co-accused persons including the petitioner / child in conflict with law (for brevity, "CICL") and one unknown person already present there, who tried to forcibly take him somewhere, and when he opposed to the same, then Md. Lal, with an intention to kill, shot at him which hit him on the left side of his face causing injury. He somehow freed himself from their clutches and ran away from there. Meanwhile, Md. Eido also shot at him but the shot missed him.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/NyM4MjUjMjAyNSMxI04=-7oTwFZ5pgCQ=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.