IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.96 of 2011 ROSHAN KUMAR @ VIKKY KUMAR S/O- SHANKAR THAKUR, R/O- VILLAGE BHALUI, P.S.- CHANAN, DISTT. LAKHISARAI UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP OF HIS GRANDFATHER DASHRATH THAKUR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR - ---------- 5 14.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is declared juvenile in conflict with law. He is facing charge under Sections 363, 366, 376, 377 and 34 of Indian Penal Code. Allegation is that he, by deceitful means, abducted/kidnapped the wife of the complainant-informant and took her to Delhi where he committed rape on her under threat. The girl was subsequently produced before the Magistrate for recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.. Said statement is on record as Annexure-2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from the materials on record, this much is evident that the victim and the petitioner are related to each other. It is submitted that because of animosity between the two families, the present complaint/F.I.R. has been lodged with concocted allegations few days after the occurrence. It is next submitted that he is in custody/remand home since 9.8.2010. Learned Appellate Court in paragraph 6 observed as under: “Considering the submissions urged at the bar going through impugned order, L.C.R., case diary and the statement of the victim recorded U/S 164 Cr.P.C. it is manifest that the 2 victim has supported the allegation that the appellant forcibly took away her to New Delhi, kept her confined for a month and committed rape and unnatural offence against her consent after causing threats which goes to indicate the criminal behaviour of the appellant. It is alleged that the appellant is the cousin of the victim and the victim boarded the train after reposing faith upon the appellant and believing his version and thereby she was forced to surrender at the will of the appellant and further considering that the Juvenile Justice Board after considering that release of the appellant is likely to bring the appellant in association of known criminals and there is likelihood of his moral and physical danger which may ruin the character and career of the juvenile and as such Juvenile Justice Board has rightly rejected the prayer of release of the appellant on bail. This court is also of the opinion that the release of the appellant will not be beneficial for the interest of the juvenile as well as for the interest of the society and keeping the appellant confined in the remand home is better solution for his reform. In the result finding no merit in this appeal, the same is hereby dismissed.” Having heard both the parties and after perusal of the materials on record, this Court, for the present, is in agreement with the view taken by the Appellate Court. The application is dismissed. Petitioner is, however, granted liberty to renew prayer for bail in the Court below, if the trial does not record/register adequate progress within seven months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In case such prayer is made, the same shall be considered on its own merit uninfluenced by the present order. pkj (Kishore K. Mandal, J)