The court considered the juvenile status, lack of criminal antecedent, and absence of recovery or allegation of using a firearm in granting bail to the petitioner.

JUDGMENT

Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. - The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. The matter has been taken up after being specially notified under orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

3. Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned senior counsel along with Mr. Anuj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State.

4. The present Revision Application is directed against the order dated 28.11.2020 passed by the Special Judge (Children Court), Gaya in Criminal (Juvenile)- 59 of 2020 (CIS) by which the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected.

5. The allegation against the petitioner is that he, along with five other co-accused, had assembled near the bank of Falgu river, planning to commit crime, the firearm of co-accused, Md. Firoz, while being checked by co-accused, Md. Ibrahim, misfired and hit the leg of co-accused, Md. Ekram and people of nearby area upon hearing sound of gunshot had come and taken the injured to hospital for treatment and thereafter the police had come and on the basis of disclosure by Md. Ekram, had gone to the spot and arrested the other four co-accused, including the petitioner and there was recovery of bullet from Md. Firoz and Md. Ibrahim and further that on the basis of information given by Md. Firoz, there was recovery of one countrymade pistol which was buried in a black plastic bag under the sand.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is a juvenile and even if the allegation is taken to be true at face value, he is neither the person who had firearm with him nor is the person who had fired nor was the person who has hit by firearm. It was submitted that the petitioner being the juvenile and also accepted by the Court below to be a juvenile, is in custody since 09.09.2020. Learned counsel submitted that co-accused Md. Ekram and Md. Firoz have been granted bail in Cr. Misc. No. 358 of 2021 by order dated22.02.2021 and Cr. Misc. No. 8296 of 2021 by order dated 27.05.2021, respectively. It was submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

7. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner was also part of the gang which had assembled to commit crime. However, it was not controverted that there has been neither any recovery from the petitioner nor there is any allegation of having used any firearm.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Gaya in Gaya Kotwali PS Case No. 320 of 2020, subject to the conditions (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to good behaviour of the petitioner, (iii) that the guardians and bailors shall also undertake that the petitioner shall not be allowed to get into any company which may bring him in contact with any anti-social element and (iv) the petitioner shall co-operate with the Juvenile Justice Board, Gaya and the police/prosecution. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or non co-operation shall lead to cancellation of his bail bonds.

9. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioner, to the notice of the Juvenile Justice Board, Gaya, which shall take immediate action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

10. The Revision Application stands allowed in the aforementioned terms.