IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.395 of 2011 Rahul Kumar @ Bajrangi Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 03. 29.06.2011 Petitioner who has been declared juvenile in conflict with law, is aggrieved by the appellate order dated 23.12.2010, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Patna in Cr. Appeal No.278 of 2010, whereby his prayer for release from the remand home was considered and rejected. Petitioner is facing charge punishable under diverse sections of the Penal Code including section 376 IPC. He is said to have committed rape on a five-year-old grand daughter of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody/remand home since 22.07.2010. The father is ready and willing to take care of the petitioner in case he is released on bail. Learned APP, on the other hand, opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is an accused of heinous crime which was committed in dare-devil manner as would appear from perusal of the FIR itself. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and on going through materials on record including the reasons spelt out in the appellate order, this Court has no reason to disagree with the view taken by the learned lower appellate court. Prayer for bail is accordingly refused. 2 Let the trial be expedited. If within seven months from the date of receipt/communication of the order in the court below the trial does not record adequate progress, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )