IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.363 of 2011 KUNDAN KUMAR @ KUNDAN SINGH, SON OF SANOJ SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- CHAINPUR, P.S.- WENA, DISTRICT- NALANDA. ……PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. PRAMOD KUMAR, SON OF RAM NARESH THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- MURARPUR, MADARSA GALI, BIHAR SHARIF, P.S.- LAHERI, DISTRICT-NALANDA. ……..OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 2. 07.04.2011 The petitioner is juvenile in conflict with law. The prayer is for grant of bail in a case instituted under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the case of juvenile, considering the provisions of the Act bail is the rule. It is next contended that he is in the remand home since 20.10.2010. I have perused the materials on record including the allegation contained in the F.I.R. While the informant was returning home on a motorcycle he was followed by another motorcycle. Ultimately the said motorcycle took over the informant and intercepted him. Under threat of being killed/ assaulted he was robbed of his belongings including the motorcycle. It is apparent from the F.I.R. that youngsters were involved in the commission of crime. Keeping in view the setting of facts in which the robbery was committed by the accuseds who were seemingly minors, there appear to be substance in the conclusion of the appellate court while refusing prayer for bail. Thus, agreeing with the view taken by the appellate court, I am not inclined to admit him on bail. Prayer is accordingly, rejected. 2 It has also been contended that father and other family members are ready and willing to maintain the conduct and behavior of the petitioner in case released on bail. The petitioner is, therefore, granted liberty to renew prayer for bail after five months in the court below which shall be considered in the light of all the attending facts and disposed of uninfluenced by the present order. Devendra/ (K.K. Mandal, J.)