CRM-M No.8056 of 2011 (O&M) *** Baldeep Singh and another Vs. State of Punjab Present: Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate for the petitioners. Dr. U.S. Dhaliwal, Addl.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Sanjeev K. Virk, Advocate for the complainant. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case F.I.R. No.60 dated 05.12.2010 registered under Sections 307, 323, 324, 34 IPC at Police Station Behram, District S.B.S. Nagar. On 16.03.2011 the following contention was noticed:- “Learned counsel has argued that in regard to the petitioner No.1 once it is admitted that he is a minor, in normal circumstances bail should have been granted but in any case custodial interrogation cannot be done and, therefore, the reasoning of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is erroneous. Further argues that the exams of 12th class of the petitioner have started and the next exam is scheduled for 17.03.2011 i.e. tomorrow. With regard to petitioner No.2, he has argued that it is case of cross-version.” CRM-M No.8056 of 2011 (O&M) -2- On instructions from A.S.I. Raman Kumar learned Additional Advocate General has pointed out that the petitioner No.1 is no more a student of the Government Model Sr. Secondary School and his name has been struck of on 13.12.2010 and further that he has not taken any exam. He has further pointed out that injury suffered by Mohan Singh is probably a self inflicted injury. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that Section 10 read with Section 12 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for brevity ‘the Act’) has made special provisions for bail of juvenile. That may be so, but the present is not a case for anticipatory bail. In the circumstances, the provisions of Sections 10 and 12 of the Act would not be applicable in the present case. However, if the petitioner No.1 surrenders before the Competent Court he shall be sent to a Juvenile Justice Board and any bail application that he files shall be decided within three days. Petition stands disposed of qua petitioner No.1. With regard to petitioner No.2, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for permission to withdraw the same. Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn qua petitioner No.2. ( AJAY TEWARI ) April 06, 2011 JUDGE ashish