IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.901 of 2009 BHIM KUMAR @ DILIP KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----- 5/ 11.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. In a case of dacoity, petitioner’s name appeared in confession made by co-accused Chandan, who is also a juvenile. The trial was in progress. So, the direction was made while Chandan appeared for bail before a Bench of this Court to allow him on bail, if trial was not concluded since 31st October, 2009 which has not been concluded, as contained in order dated 03.11.2009 (Annexure- 5). So, petitioner standing on better footing may not be justified to keep behind the bar even after taking into consideration privilege given under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (care and protection) Act. Taking into consideration the circumstance suggested by the learned counsel, petitioner’s revision application is allowed and at the same time, the Judgment and order dated 07.05.2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Gaya in Cr. Appeal (Juvenile) No. 95 of 2009 is set aside. Let the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M., Jehanabad in connection with Jehanabad G.R.P. P.S. Case No. 2 of 2009, G.R. No. 18 of 2009/Tr. No. 968 of 2009. 2 One of the bailers shall be the father of the petitioner, who would undertake to keep the petitioner under his observation and produced whenever is required by the Juvenile Justice Board or Court. shail (Mandhata Singh, J.)