IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1363 of 2010 ALOK RAI S/O- JITENDRA RAI, R/O- VILLAGE BASAWANPUR, P.S.- GOPALPUR, DISTRICT- GOPALGANJ (BIHAR), UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP OF HIS FATHER. Versus STATE OF BIHAR 3 16.12.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioner is aggrieved by the appellate order dated 16.6.2010 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in Cr. Appeal No. 22 of 2010 rejecting the prayer of release/bail made on behalf of the petitioner who has already been declared juvenile in conflict with law. He is an accused under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code. Circumstantial evidence collected in course of investigation does indicate complicity of the petitioner. Learned lower appellate Court has considered in detail the incriminating materials available in the diary against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has remained in custody/remand home since 12.1.2010. The father of the petitioner has taken upon himself the responsibility respecting the petitioner in the event of his release. It appears from the order dated 30.4.2010 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gopalganj that before rejecting his claim, report of the Probation Officer was also called for. Having perused the report and after going through the materials on record, his release was not found expedient. - 2 - Learned appellate Court on a perusal of the materials on record has also found the same. The neck of the deceased was cut by sickle. 2-3 persons were involved in the incident. Having regard to the manner in which the occurrence was committed, this Court is of the view that the observation made in the impugned order that his release from the custody, at this stage, would defeat the ends of justice, seems to be reasonable. In that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to allow the present application. It is accordingly dismissed. However, having regard to the fact that he is in custody since 12.1.2010, this Court gives liberty to the petitioner to apply for bail once again in the Court below, if the trial does not record substantial progress within a period of seven (07) months from the date of receipt/communication of the present order. pkj (Kishore K. Mandal, J)