MUNNA RAJWANSHI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State.

(2.) This revision application has been filed against order dated 04-01-2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-IIIrd, Gaya in Cr.Appeal(Juv.) No. 93 of 2009/176 of 2009, by which he has dismissed the appeal confirming the order dated 01-12-2009 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Gaya in Atri P.S. Case No. 117/2009, whereby it had rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

(3.) Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that love affair of the petitioner with the victim girl has been made accusation may not be a correct position finding the girl minor but at the verge of majority and the girl voluntarily left her parental house and came to this petitioner, which is clear from her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Further it is submitted on behalf of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that within two hours of the incident both the petitioner and the victim girl were caught. He further submits that without taking care of the same Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court has refused the petitioner's bail, even without applying the provision of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, which in my view also is not proper and justified.