Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No. 540 of 2012 ====================================================== Md. Raza S/0 Sri Ansarul Haq R/O Village- Patahi Jagarnath, P.S. Sadar, District- Muzaffarpur. (through father, Ansarul Haq, who is natural guardian of the petitioner) .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL ORDER 2. 14-05-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The present revision application is for grant of bail to the petitioner under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. Earlier such prayer was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board, Muzaffarpur on 02.06.2011 in Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No. 299/2010. The appeal was also dismissed on 14.03.2012 by the Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Cr. Appeal No. 10 of 2012. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No. 299 of 2010 dated 03.11.2010 registered for offence under [STATUTE] . Later on [STATUTE] were also added. Patna High Court CR. REV. No.540 of 2012 (2) dt.14-05-2012 2 / 4 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner summits that he was not named in the F.I.R. and was later on made an accused only on the alleged statement of a co-accused namely, Ajeet Kumar. It is submitted that from the mobile of one Kundan Kumar call for ransom was made to the family members of the kidnapped boy. Kundan Kumar told the police that he had given the mobile to Rakesh Kumar who in turn took the name of Ajeet Kumar from whom the sim card was recovered. Ajeet Kumar is alleged to have taken the name of the petitioner as being also involved in the crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the age of the petitioner has been assessed by the Juvenile Justice Board to be 13 years 9 months and 22 days on the date of occurrence. It is also stated that the petitioner has clean antecedent. Learned counsel has produced web copy of order dated 04.01.2012 in Cr. Revision No. 1210 of 2011 by which this Court had granted bail to another co-accused namely, Ravi Kumar in the present case. Similarly by order dated 21.02.2012 in Cr. Revision No. 207 of 2012, this Court had granted bail to two other co-accused namely, Manoj Kumar and Ajeet Kumar. Let the copies of the orders be kept on record. It is submitted that the petitioner is the youngest among the accused and is in custody since 21.11.2010. Learned counsel submits that the only ground of rejection of prayer for bail by the Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur is that Patna High Court CR. REV. No.540 of 2012 (2) dt.14-05-2012 3 / 4 3 there is confession of guilt and there is overwhelming evidence in the case diary to show his involvement in the crime and that chargesheet has been submitted. On the said basis the Sessions Judge has opined that his release would frustrate the ends of justice. It is submitted that the same is erroneous since even if the complicity of the juvenile is found still he has to be released on bail and only under the circumstances where there is substantial evidence to show that he may get into the company of known criminals or it would expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice such prayer should be refused. In the present case the petitioner being of tender age as well as all other co-accused older to him having been released on bail the refusal of bail to the petitioner is unsustainable. Considering the facts and circumstances of case, let the petitioner namely, Md. Raza be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Muzaffarpur in connection with Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No. 299 of 2010. One of the bailors should be the father of the petitioner who shall also execute a bond of good behaviour with regard to the petitioner and also give an undertaking that he would not indulge in any criminal activity. Any Patna High Court CR. REV. No.540 of 2012 (2) dt.14-05-2012 4 / 4 4 violation of the terms and conditions shall lead to automatic cancellation of bail in the present case. The petitioner shall physically present himself before the Probation Officer, Muzaffarpur at least once a month and also as and when directed by him. The Probation Officer, Muzaffarpur shall maintain strict supervision over the petitioner. The order dated 14.03.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Cr. Appeal No. 10 of 2012 as well as the order dated 02.06.2011 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Muzaffarpur in Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No. 299 of 2010 are set aside. This application, accordingly, stands disposed off. Anand Kr. (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 364

Statute Text:
Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code. Kidnapping or abducting in order to murder. Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person in order that such person may be murdered or may be so disposed of as to be put in danger of being murdered, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.