D.K. Sinha, J.@mdashThe Petitioner Md. Adil has preferred this criminal revision u/s 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 for setting aside the order impugned dated 20.12.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Godda in criminal appeal No. 141/2010 by which prayer for bail of the Petitioner rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board, Godda in enquiry No. 217/2010 for the alleged offence u/s 302/120B/34 of the Indian Penal code 27 of the Arms Act was affirmed and his appeal was dismissed.
2. The prosecution story in short was that the contractor Mani Kant Sah was shot dead by the miscreants namely Gulam Ansari, Sahwaj Ansari and Cloud Kisku by means of firearms. The First Information Report was instituted against named accused persons. Admittedly the Petitioner was not named in the First Information Report, yet, he was remanded in the instant case on 25.10.10 on the basis of his confessional statement wherein he admitted that he had assisted the accused persons in the said offence. It was alleged by the informant (widow of the deceased) that two boys came to her home and had demanded extortion money in the name of Cloud Kisku and Gulam Ansari. There was no material except his confessional statement before the police.
3. The Juvenile Justice Board rejected the prayer for bail of the Petitioner only on the ground that he was also an accused in another case vide Lalmatia P.S. case No. 95/10. His appeal for bail was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Godda in the criminal appeal No. 141/10 arising out of the instant case by observing that - "Keeping in view the brutal nature of assault made by the Appellant in association of other criminals there is every chance of the Appellant to come in contact with known criminal."
4. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Dev submits that there appears gross error of record in the impugned order. There was no allegation of participation of the Petitioner in commission of murder of the husband of the informant.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I find that both the court below committed error by not appreciating the statutory provisions of law u/s 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 where in bail of the juvenile has been made rule and rejection an exception.
6. In the facts and circumstances, the Petitioner Md. Adil is directed to be released on executing bail bond of Rs. 10,000 (Rupees Ten Thousand)/-with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Godda in Boarijore P.S. Case No. 93/2010, corresponding to G.R. No. 1085/2010 with the conditions that the parents of the Petitioner would be his bailer who would take care of him and produce him before the Board preferably in the first week of every month during the course of enquiry or on the date suggested by the Juvenile Justice Board in each month till conclusion of the enquiry failing which the Board would be at liberty to pass appropriate order against the Petitioner.
7. With this observation the criminal revision is allowed.
