Posted On by &filed under High Court, Patna High Court - Orders.

Patna High Court – Orders
Prince Kumar @ Pinish Mahto @ … vs The State Of Bihar on 9 September, 2011
                                    CR. REV. No.1126 of 2011
                   Prince Kumar @ Pinish Mahto @ Pinish Kumar son
                   of Rameshwar Mahto, resident of village- Pir
                   Nagar, P.S.- Naokothi and Distt- Begusarai.
                                                       ... Petitioner.
                    The State Of Bihar             .. Opp. Party.

For the Petitioner :Dr. Amrandra Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Udai Pratap Singh, APP


2. 09.09.2011 The accused- petitioner has preferred

this revision application under Section 53 of

the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of

Children) Act, 2000 against the judgment dated

29th July 2010 passed by learned Sessions

Judge, Begusarai in Cr. Appeal No.72 of 2010 by

which the order dated 12.4.2010 passed by

learned Juvenile Justice Board, Begusarai in

Nawkothi P. S. Case No. 90 of 2008 (G.R. No.

3310 / 08) under Sections 25(1-b)A, 26, 35 and

27 of the Arms Act has been confirmed and the

appeal has been dismissed.

                              The       main      contention          of     Learned

                  counsel        for    the     petitioner       is        that     the

                  petitioner       is     a    juvenile      declared        by     the

Juvenile Justice Board. He filed a petition for

grant of bail which was rejected by the learned

Juvenile Justice Board vide order dated

12.4.2010, whereafter he filed Cr. Appeal No.

72 of 2010 which has been dismissed by the

learned Sessions Judge on the ground that the

petitioner was arrested at the spot with

firearms and ammunition to murder informant and

witnesses of this case and he is involved in

two other cases of murder and one case of

extortion and attempt to murder. Learned

counsel for the petitioner has further

submitted that the petitioner has been in

custody since 31.8.2008 and under the provision

of Juvenile Justice Act maximum punishment for

a juvenile is three years only. The petitioner

has been in custody for more than three years

in this case.

Learned A.P.P. for the State could

not controvert the contention of the petitioner

while opposing the prayer.

Considering the detention of the

petitioner in custody, the impugned order is

set aside. The above named petitioner is

directed to be released on bail on furnishing

bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only)

with two sureties of the like amount each to

the satisfaction of learned Juvenile Justice

Board, Begusarai in connection with Nawkothi P.

S. Case No. 90 of 2008 (G. R. No. 3310/08) with

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


(iii) The petitioner will not 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.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

107 queries in 0.204 seconds.