IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.493 of 2011 ANAND PRAKASH @ PRINCE S/O- ARBIND KUMAR SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 01.07.2011 Heard both sides. Petitioner, who has been declared juvenile in conflict with law, has been charged for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and is lodged in the Remand Home since 22.7.2010. His prayer for release from Remand Home was considered and rejected by the two Courts below. It appears from the materials on record including the appellate order that the name of the petitioner transpired through the confessional statement of some of the co- accused and accordingly he was put on T.I.P. and identified by 01 witness. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not carry any criminal antecedent and belongs to a well neat family. The father of the petitioner is ready and willing to monitor his conduct and to safeguard against the petitioner mingling with anti-social elements, if released on bail. A report from the concerned Probation Officer was called for which is at Flag-A. Perused the records. It appears therefrom that the petitioner is tethered to the family and the father is willing to take control of the petitioner. 2 In the facts and circumstances, while setting aside the impugned order, this Court directs release of the petitioner from the Remand Home on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Gaya in connection M.U. P.S. Case No. 56 of 2010 subject to the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors shall be father of the petitioner. It shall be the duly of the father to produce the petitioner before the concerned Probation Officer once in a fortnight for a period of five months from the date of release affording an opportunity to the Probation Officer to appraise his conduct. It shall also be the duty of the father to produce him in the criminal proceeding as and when his personal appearance is required. In default of any of the aforesaid condition, the Trial Court shall have liberty to cancel bail bonds of the petitioner. (ii) During the subsistency of the present privilege of bail, if it is found that the petitioner is found involved in any other criminal case, the same shall be treated as a breach of condition of bail entailing cancellation. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J)