IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1288 of 2011 Ravi Ranjan Kumar Ravi @ Ravi Ranjan Rai, son of Horil Rai R/o Mohalla New Bankers Colony, Shastri Nagar, P.S. Mithanpura District Muzaffarpur …………………………Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar ………………………….Opposite Party. -------------- 2 18.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The accused petitioner has preferred this revision application under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 against the order dated 25th August 2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Cr. Appeal No. 34 of 2011 by which the order dated 13.05.2011 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board has been confirmed and the appeal has been dismissed and the petitioner’s prayer for bail has also been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an accused In Mithanpura P.S. Case no.33 of 2011 registered under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has been declared juvenile as order dated 30.4.2011. The prayer for bail was rejected by the learned Juvenile Justice Board vide order dated 13.05.2011. Thereafter he preferred Cri. Appeal No. 34 2 of 2011 which has been dismissed by the impugned order on the ground that the release of the petitioner on bail would certainly defeat the ends of justice. It is further submitted that there is no material on record to show that the petitioner will go into association of criminal if he is released or his release would defeat the ends of justice. The petitioner has been in custody since 13.2.2011. 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 the parties and on perusal of the materials it appears that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct. The petitioner has been in custody since 13.2.2011. The Medical Board has also found the victim to be aged about 18/19 years. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case the impugned order is not fit to be sustained in law. It is accordingly set aside. The application is allowed. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten 3 thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Muzaffarpur in Mithanpura P.S. Case no. 33 of 2011 on the following conditions: That the parents of the petitioner will take care of the petitioner and they will produce the petitioner before the Board as and when required and in case of default for two consecutive dates his bail bond would be liable to be cancelled. The petitioner will not indulge in criminal or any other offence. In case of violation of the terms, his bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled and the learned Juvenile Justice Board will take him into custody. M.Rahman (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J)