Patna High CourtCR. REV./834/2017dismissed

Wakil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-11-13Mr. Justice Arun Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.834 of 2017 ====================================================== Wakil Kumar, Son of Dashrath Singh, Resident of Bikram Bigha, P.S.- Tilauthu, District- Rohtas .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Nandan Sahay For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Rajeev Nayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-11-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner has preferred the revision petition against the impugned order dated 24.03.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Cr. Appeal No. 11 of 2017 by upholding the correctness of the order of the Juvenile Justice Board refusing the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Juvenile Justice Board as well as the Sessions Court have refused to grant bail to the petitioner, admittedly a juvenile, only on the sole ground that having criminal antecedents, in case of release on bail, he may go in association of known criminals. However, the petitioner has been on bail granted by the Juvenile Justice Board in those previous cases and the father will undertake to keep in his guardianship and care and the petitioner has been made accused

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.834 of 2017 (6) dt.13-11-2017 2/2 merely on the basis of confessional statement and for last two years enquiry is going on.

Having examined the matter, the Court does not find any illegality in the impugned order. The petitioner is found accused in four criminal cases of serious nature, murder, Arms Act and preparation for committing dacoity, so the only conclusion would be that in case of his release, he may go in association of known criminals. So in the backdrop of such facts, his release is not in the interest of justice or in the interest of a juvenile. However, the Juvenile Justice Board is directed to expedite the enquiry and conclude the same preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petition stands dismissed.

(Arun Kumar, J) Sujit/- U T