TEJKUMAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition is directed against order dated 26/02/2015 of II Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 89/2015 declining the Sapurdgi of juvanile to his father against whom the case under Section 34(2) Excise Act has been registered.

(2.) Leaned counsel submits that Juvanile has been apprehended by Police along with three coaccused persons on the basis of memorandum of adult coaccused containing allegations of possession of 180 litres bulk liquor in Maruti Van. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that father/petitioner, having no criminal antecedents and is keen and willing to have custody of juvanile with him, so that juvanile can be provided family atmosphere. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that even the report of the Probationary Officer indicates that criminal is a God fearing boy having disciplined habits in remand home.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner undertakes to be very protective and caring for the child / juvanile during currency of bail, so that juvanile will get positive atmosphere in house, which is required for his better development.