Shaheb Paswan @ Saheb @ Ganesh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.956 of 2017 ====================================================== Shaheb Paswan @ Saheb @ Ganesh Paswan, Son of Shambhu Paswan, R/o Village- Mohania, P.S.- Mohania, District- Kaimur at Bhabua. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Nityanand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, being aggrieved by the order rejecting bail by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kaimur at Bhabua as well as affirmation of the same by order dated 22.06.2017 by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Kaimur at Bhabua in Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2017/19 of 2017, has preferred this revision application, who is an accused in Mohania P.S.Case No. 413 of 2016 registered under Sections 302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was declared juvenile by the Juvenile Justice Board and only allegation against him is that he was seen moving along with the deceased subsequently, he was found murdered by fire arms, so petitioner be enlarged on bail in view of the aforesaid facts and

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.956 of 2017 (4) dt.24-11-2017 2/2 circumstances of the case.

However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that this petitioner was also accused earlier in a case of robbery and the report submitted by the Probationary Officer is also not in his favour.

Having considered the rival submissions of both sides and on perusal of record, the Court finds that petitioner was earlier an accused in a case of robbery registered under Section 392 of Indian Penal Code and the report of the Probationary Officer, as indicated in the impugned order, reflects that he is in association of bad elements, so in case of his release, there is every chance of going in association or contact with known criminals leading exposure to moral, physical or psychological danger. So the Juvenile Justice Board and the appellate court has for good reason refused the bail of the petitioner. This application stands dismissed.

However, the Juvenile Justice Board is directed to expedite the enquiry and conclude the same preferably within the statutory period.

(Arun Kumar, J) Sujit/- U T