Hon’ble J.J. Munir, J.—Heard Sri Rajeev Sawhney, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Kamal Singh Yadav, learned AGA alongwith Sri Abhinav Tripathi appearing for the State and Sri Ronak Chaturvedi, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2.

2. This is a revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘’Act’) on behalf of Ankur, a juvenile/child in conflict with law through his natural guardian and father Jagvir Singh assailing a judgment and order dated 4.8.2017 passed by Sri Subhash Chand, the learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor in Criminal Appeal No. 30 of 2017 dismissing the said appeal preferred from an order dated 20.7.2017 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Bijnor in Misc. Case No. 91 of 2015, State v. Ankur (arising out of Case Crime No. 696 of 2015), under Sections 302, 307, 120B IPC and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor, refusing second bail to the revisionist.

3. The facts giving rise to the First Information Report are that a first information was lodged by one Anuj Kumar that in the background of animosity between his family and the family of Dheer Singh, a native of his village on 15.8.2015 at 7.00 in the morning hours his father Aman Singh had gone to attend the flag hoisting at the Janta Inter College, Dhokalpur on the Independence Day, where Jagvir Singh alias Pappu, Ankur and the two unknown associates were present at the venue. The persons aforesaid abused his father who forbade them from abusive language, in immediate response Jagvir @ Pappu shot his father by a pistol, which hit his father on the head, as also did Ankur. The shot fired by Ankur hit one Hemendra, a companion of Aman Singh. The incident is said to have been witnessed by Ashok Kumar, Hukam Singh, Harpal Singh, Devendra and many others present. The informant’s father died on the spot and the condition of Hemendra was said to be serious. It was alleged that in the incident, aforesaid Dheer Singh @ Joly was also said to be involved.

4. The said FIR was registered as Case Crime No. 696 of 2015, under Sections 307, 302, 120B IPC and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnor against Jegvir Singh, Ankur (the revisionist) and Dheer Singh. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against each of the nominated accused.

5. An application was made on behalf of the revisionist before the Juvenile Justice Board seeking a declaration that he was a juvenile and be dealt as such. The Juvenile Justice Board by their order dated 12.2.2016 after hearing the parties and examining the record held the revisionist to be a juvenile aged about 16 years 3 months and 10 days on the date of occurrence. On the foot of the said order the revisionist’s mother made an application to the Juvenile Justice Board in the present crime for his release on bail alleging that he had been implicated on account of hostilities between families and there is no evidence against him; that the revisionist bears a good character; that the revisionist would not misuse the liberty of bail; that she has full control over her son; and, that the juvenile be given into her custody. The said application for bail came to be rejected by an order of the Juvenile Justice Board dated 20.7.2017.

6. The revisionist went up in appeal to the learned Sessions Judge, Bijnor from the order of the Juvenile Justice Board declining bail. The appeal aforesaid being Criminal Appeal No. 30 of 2017 was heard and dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge vide his order dated 4.8.2017. Aggrieved the present revision has been filed under Section 102 of the Act.

7. It is noticed that a bail application had also been made earlier to the Juvenile Justice Board, which after hearing parties and considering the report of the District Probation Officer came to be rejected by an order dated 9.3.2016. From that order rejecting the first bai