IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1201 of 2011 Ujjwal Kumar Minor Son Of Sri Ram Lalit Prasad Singh Resident of Village- Gamharia, Police Station- Majorganj in the District Of Sitamarhi, presently residing in the Officers Flat, Begusarai Police Line, Police Station- Begusarai Town in the District Of Begusarai ,through his natural guardian and mother Punam Singh, wife of Sri Ram Lalit Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Gamharia, Police Station - Majorganj in the District of Sitamarhi. …………..Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar ………Opposite Party ----------- 3. 9.11.2011 The accused petitioner has preferred this revision application under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 against the order dated 25.08.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Begusarai in Cr. Appeal No.80/2011 by which the order dated 19.07.2011 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Begusarai in Begusarai Town P.S. Case No.355 of 2010 under Section 379 of the I.P.C. has been confirmed and the prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail has been rejected. Heard Mr. Akhileshwar Prasad Singh, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. I.B.Pandey, learned counsel for the State. The main contention of the learned counsel for 2 the petitioner is that the petitioner has been declared a juvenile by the learned Juvenile Justice Board vide order dated 13.07.2011. His prayer for bail was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board vide order dated 19.07.2011. Against the said order, the petitioner preferred Cr. Appeal No.80/11, which has been dismissed by the impugned order. It is submitted that the petitioner has been remanded in this case on 13.07.2011. He has further submitted that a report has been called for from the Probation Officer, Begusarai through the Juvenile Justice Board, Begusarai, which has been received vide letter no.89 dated 28.09.2011. It shows that the petitioner has become addict of intoxication and his father will get him treated so that the petitioner could get relief from intoxication. He has further submitted that the family of the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. In the report, it has also been recommended that an opportunity should be given to the petitioner for his treatment. Learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of the petitioner while opposing the prayer of the petitioner. After hearing the learned counsel for both the 3 parties and on perusal of the materials on record as well as report, it appears that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct. The petitioner has been in custody since 28.09.2010 and has been remanded in this case on 13.07.2011. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, in my opinion, the impugned order is not fit to be sustained. The impugned order is set aside. The petitioner above-named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Begusarai in Begusarai Town P.S. Case No.355 of 2010 on the following terms and conditions : (i) Father and Mother of the petitioner will be the bailors. (ii) They will produce the petitioner in the court if and when required. (iii) The petitioner will not indulge in similar or in any other offence. (iv) In case of his absence for two 4 consecutive dates or in case of violation of the terms of the bail, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled by the learned Juvenile Justice Board and he will be taken into custody. In the result, this application is allowed. Let this order be communicated to the court below through fax at the cost of the petitioner. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)