IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1763 of 2010 Rajesh Mahto @ Rajesh Kumar son of Ram Sogarath Mahto, resident of village- Sakrauli, P.S.- Cheriabariyarpur, Dist.- Begusarai, through his father ad-litem. … Petitioner. Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 7. 05.07.2011 The accused-petitioner has preferred this cr. revision application against the order dated 23.9.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Begusarai in Cr. Appeal No. 92 of 2010 by which the appeal has been dismissed and the prayer for bail has also been rejected. It is submitted that the petitioner is an accused in Cheriya Bariyarpur P.S. Case No. 77 of 2009 for offence punishable under Section 395/412 I.P.C.. The petitioner was declared juvenile by order dated 27.5.2010 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board and thereafter a prayer for bail was made for release of the petitioner which was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board vide its order dated 7th July 2010. Against that order the petitioner preferred Cr. Appeal No. 92 of 2010 which was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge vide impugned order on the ground that the petitioner has criminal antecedent. 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that a report has also been called for from the Chief Probation Officer, Begusarai who had submitted his report vide letter No. 60 dated 28.2.2011 from which it appears that the petitioner was earlier an accused in Rail P. S. Case No. 51 of 2009 and also a case is pending for the theft of mobile phone. It appears that he had made query from the co-villagers who have stated before him that due to rivalry the petitioner has been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the father of the petitioner will look after him and he will produce the petitioner if and when required in the Court. Learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner while opposing the prayer for bail of the accused-petitioner. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the impugned order it appears that accused petitioner has criminal antecedent but there is no material on record to show that the release of the petitioner is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral physical or 3 psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. The petitioner has been in custody since 9.1.2010. Considering the facts and circumstances, in my opinion, the impugned order is not sustainable, it is accordingly set aside. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Begusarai in connection with Cheriya Bariyarpur P. S. Case No. 77 of 2009, subject to the condition that one of the bailor must be the father of the petitioner and with further condition that the petitioner will not indulge himself in similar or any other offence and will appear in the Court if and when required. In case of violation of any of terms of this bail, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled by the Juvenile Justice Board. In the result, this cri. revision petition is allowed. kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)