IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.928 of 2009 MD.ZAMALUDDIN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03 30.06.2009 Heard both sides. The present application in revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 8th May, 2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Saharsa passed in Cr. Appeal No. 3/2009(S) invoking provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. By the said order, the prayer for enlarging the petitioner on bail on the ground that he is juvenile has been refused. Petitioner is facing prosecution punishable under Section 376 of the Penal Code. A bare perusal of the impugned order reflects that prior to the present occurrence he had made an attempt to commit rape on a girl. The learned Juvenile Court, having regard to the materials on record, of course, declared him juvenile but while appreciating his prayer for bail, the same was refused on the ground that if he is released on bail, there is every possibility that he will come in the association of criminals. The learned Appellate Court, having regard to the materials on record, has also endorsed the view in paragraph no.12 of the impugned order. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 04.08.2008. He draws attention of the court to the averments made in paragraph no.13 of the bail application which reads thus: “13.That in any view of the matter father of the petitioner undertook that he will keep the petitioner in his safe custody and he will not allow him to indulge to any other anti social activities or criminal activities nor he will allow him to mix with the criminal, it was just and proper that the court below ought to have release the petitioner on bail.” Having regard to the materials on record, particularly, the findings recorded by the two courts below, this court, for the present, is not inclined to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner. Prayer for bail is accordingly rejected. However, having regard to the fact that he is in custody since 04.08.2008 and that the father of the petitioner, who has affirmed the affidavit, has made a statement as noted above, this court, grants liberty to the petitioner to renew prayer for bail in the court below itself after nine months, if the trial, in the meanwhile, does not conclude. In the event, the petitioner makes an application in terms of the liberty so granted to him by this court, the same shall be considered on its own merit uninfluenced by the present order. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)