IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.924 of 2009 Randhir Prasad @ Randhir Kumar, Son of late Naresh Prasad, resident of village- Manjhla, P.S.-Rajauli, District- Nawada. . . . . . Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate, For the State : Mr. Nirbhay Kr. Singh, A.P.P. ----------- 4/ 16.07.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the lower appellate court in Cr. Appeal No. 65 of 2009 whereby his prayer for grant of release on bail has been refused. Petitioner is a named accused of a case instituted under Sections 307, 302 and other allied Sections of the Indian Penal Code with the allegation in the First Information Report that brother of the informant was intercepted by the accused persons including the petitioner. Petitioner is said to have assaulted with Tangi on hand. It is contended that assault ultimately proved fatal. Learned counsel submits that other accused persons in the present case are own / close family members of the petitioner. It is further contended that on a claim being raised by him that he was declared juvenile by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Magadh Division, Gaya under order dated 17.02.2009. Learned counsel, therefore, submits that petitioner should be released on bail. It is further contended that the police thoroughly investigated the case and submitted charge-sheet against the other accused persons but the petitioner was not sent up for trial by the police / investigating officer. - 2 - The learned Juvenile Justice Board initially rejected his prayer for bail under order dated 27.02.2009 concluding that there is likelihood of the petitioner ‘on release’ coming into the association of known criminals. Petitioner aggrieved by the aforesaid order preferred appeal, which, as noted above, has been rejected. The lower appellate court considering the allegations and the fact that he appears to be the main assailant of the case, took a view that his release would frustrate the ends of justice. Learned counsel submits that the brother of the petitioner affirmed the present affidavit filed along with the present revision application and he will take full responsibility of the juvenile petitioner if released on bail. It is further contended that he is prepared to file affidavit in the court below stating that once he is released on bail he shall produce the petitioner on the date (s) fixed at the trial and to monitor his activities. In case he finds that the petitioner is not mending his ways he will himself approach the court below to cancel the bail bond of the petitioner and thereafter it shall be open to the court below/court in seisin of the matter to cancel the bail bonds and remand him to jail / remand home. Having considered all the aspects of the matters, this court is prepared to allow him to be released from the custody / remand home on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.8,000/- (eight thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Magadh Division, Gaya in connection with Juvenile Trial No. 463 of 2005 / 164 (N) of 2009, subject to the following conditions: - 3 - (i) One of the bailors shall be the full brother of the petitioner (Brajnath Prasad). (ii) The aforesaid Brajnath Prasad (brother of the petitioner) shall file an affidavit in terms of the submissions made by him before this court and taken note of hereinabove along with the bail bonds. The revision application stands disposed of. Uday/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)