IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.76 of 2011 SATYENDRA SHARMA SON OF LATE RAMSWARATH SHARMA, R/O- VILLAGE- KANAULI, P.S.- MAKHDUMPUR, DISTRICT- JEHANABAD. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAUSHAN KUMAR, S/O- ANIL KUMAR, R/O- VILLAGE KANAULI, P.S.- MAKHDUMPUR, DISTRICT- JEHANBAD. For the petitioner : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. S.P. Srivastava For the State : Mr. Akbar Ali, APP ----------- 2 23.02.2011 Heard both sides. Petitioner is the informant. He is aggrieved by the order dated 22.12.2010 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jehanabad in Cr. Appeal No. 37 of 2010 whereby the appeal preferred by O.P. No. 2 stood disposed of by the following observation: “The Juvenile Justice Board is directed once again to decide the age of the Appellant on the date of occurrence i.e. 15.03.2010 in the light of direction given earlier in Criminal Appeal No. 23/2010.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no grievance with regard to the order dated 6.10.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge on earlier appeal preferred by O.P. No. 2 being Cr. Appeal No. 23/2010. It is submitted that after remand, the learned Juvenile Justice Board proceeded with the inquiry and in the meanwhile, the appeal was preferred which according to him was not maintainable. However, learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to dispute that by the order impugned, Juvenile Justice Board has only been directed to decide the claim of juvenility raised by O.P. No. 2 in terms of the 2 provisions contained under the Act as also the directions given earlier by the appellate Court in Cr. Appeal No. 23/2010. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Juvenile Justice Board may be directed to conclude the inquiry expeditiously . I have heard the submission made on behalf of the parties and also gone through the materials on record. This Court while not interfering with the order impugned disposes of the application with a direction that the learned Juvenile Justice Board shall conclude the inquiry as per the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder read along with directions contained in paragraph 6 of order of the Appellate Court passed in Cr. Appeal No. 23 of 2010 (Annexure-3) expeditiously. The application stands disposed of. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )