Rahul Kumar @ Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.179 of 2016 Arising out of P.S.Case No. 214 Year- 2014 Thana Baroon District- AURANGABAD =========================================================== Rahul Kumar @ Manish Kumar (Juvenile), s/o Motilal Singh, (under guardianship of his father Motial Singh), s/o late Ramraj Singh, r/o village- Hasanpur, P.S.- Baroon, District- Aurangabad (Bihar).

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha, Advocate. For the State : Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, A.P.P. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 03-10-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2.

This revision application is directed against the order dated 8th January, 2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Aurangabad (Bihar), in Cr. Appeal No. 83 of 2015, whereby while rejecting the application for bail of the petitioner, he has affirmed the order dated 11.12.2015 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Aurangabad, in connection with Baroon P.S. Case No. 214 of 2014, G.R. No. 2341 of 2014, Trial No. 878 of 2015.

3. The petitioner who is a juvenile in conflict with law has been made accused in a case registered under Sections 25(1-B)(a)

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.179 of 2016 dt.03-10-2016 2/2 and 26 of the Arms Act is a habitual offender. His application for bail was rejected by the Juvenile Justice Board, Aurangabad, on the ground that the social investigation report procured in respect of the petitioner goes to show that he is in company of known criminals and his release would further bring him into the association of such known criminals. The Appellate Court has also rejected his application for bail taking into consideration the report submitted by the Probation Officer, Aurangabad, to the effect that the petitioner is involved in three cases under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. 4 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

5.

I see no illegality in the impugned order dated 8th January, 2016 passed by the appellate court. Accordingly, the revision application is dismissed.

6. However, the Juvenile Justice Board, Aurangabad is directed to conclude the enquiry against the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order failing which the petitioner would be entitled to renew his prayer for bail before the Juvenile Justice Board, Aurangabad. (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.) S.Ali/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 04.10.2016 Transmission Date 04.10.2016