IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.909 of 2011 Rajesh Kumar, s/o Shri Krishan Kumar Chaurasiya, resident of Santo Paan Bhandar, Barh Bazar, P.S.-Barh, District- Patna. … Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar .. Opp. Party. ----------- 2. 01.08.2011 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 3.6.2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Patna in Cr. Appeal No. 132 of 2011, by which the order dated 27.4.2011 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Patna in G. R. No. 1537 of 2010 arising out of Barh P. S. Case No. 304 of 2010 under Sections 341/342/324/376 of Indian Penal code has been confirmed and the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. It is submitted that the petitioner has been declared juvenile by the Juvenile Justice Board. The prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as Appellate Court on the ground that if the petitioner is released, he 2 would come into association of known criminals. It is further submitted that there is no material on record to show that the release of the petitioner would bring him into association of any known criminal. It is also submitted that alleged victim has been examined by the Juvenile Justice Board in J. J. Board Case No. 77 of 2011 as P.W. 1. She has not stated anything about the petitioner nor she has stated about any commission of rape. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 16.12.2010. Learned counsel for the State could not controvert the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner while opposing the prayer for bail. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material on record, it appears that the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is correct. There is no material on record to show that that the release of the petitioner is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical, psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. 3 Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above, in my opinion, the impugned order is not fit to be sustained. It is set aside. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.7000/- (seven thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice Board, Patna in connection with J. J. Board Case No. 77/2011, G. R. No. 1537 of 2010, arising out of Barh P. S. Case No. 304/2010 with the following conditions;- (i) One of the bailors must be the father of the petitioner. (ii) The father of the petitioner will take care of the petitioner and he will produce the petitioner in the Court if and when required. In case of absence on two consecutive dates, his bail bonds would be liable to be cancelled. (iii) The petitioner will not 4 indulge himself in similar or in any other offence. (iv) In case of violation of the terms and conditions of bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the learned Juvenile Justice Board and he will be liable to be taken into custody. In the result, this revision application is allowed. Kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)