IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.633 of 2021

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2019 Thana- ROH District- Nawada

======================================================

MADHUSUDAN KUMAR @ RUPESH KUMAR S/o- SANJAY YADAV

Uunder legal guardianship of Sanjay Yadav Father of Petitioner), Resident of

Village- Mahkar, Post Office- Siur, Police Stastion- Roh, District- Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr.Birendra Kumar, Adv.

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH

ORAL ORDER

3

09-03-2022

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to

remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within a

period of four weeks.

Re: I.A. No. 01 of 2021

This interlocutory application has been filed for

condonation of delay in filing the present Cr. Revision.

Considering the grounds taken in the application, this

I.A. No. 01 of 2021 is allowed.

The delay in filing Cr. Revision is condoned.

This Criminal Revision has been preferred against the

judgment dated 22-03-2021 passed by the learned Additional

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.633 of 2021(3) dt.09-03-2022

2/5

Sessions Judge-Ist-cum-Special Judge, Nawada in Criminal

Appeal (J) No. 16 of 2020, whereby and where under learned

Additional Sessions Judge-Ist-cum-Special Judge, Nawada has

affirmed the order dated 05-10-2020 passed by learned Juvenile

Justice Board, Nawada in Roh P.S. Case No. 175 of 2019,

whereby learned Juvenile Justice Board, Nawada has rejected

the prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Roh P.S.

Case No. 175 of 2019, registered under Section 366(A/34 of the

Indian Penal Code.

Allegation is that the petitioner forcefully abducted the

minor daughter of the informant and put vermilion in Maang of

the victim. The petitioner committed rape upon the victim and

also took her to Tamilnadu.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the

petitioner is in custody since 04-06-2020 and has got no

criminal antecedent. There is no allegation of tampering of

witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has been

falsely implicated in the present case. There was a love affairs

between the parties. The victim had left the house with her own

will. The petitioner has relied upon the judgment of Lalu

Kumar and Ors. Vs. The State of Bihar (reported in 2019(4)

PLJR 833) where a Division Bench of this Court while

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.633 of 2021(3) dt.09-03-2022

3/5

considering the scope of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act,

2015 in paragraph No. 84 of the judgment has observed the

following:

84. While interpreting Section 12, the

Board is duty bound to be guided by the

fundamental principles enumerated in

Section 3 of the Act of 2015, specially

the principles of ‘best interest’,

‘repatriation’ and ‘restoration’ of child.

The fundamental principles in Section

3(xii) provides that a child shall be

placed in institutional care as a step of

last resort after making a reasonable

inquiry. The gravity and nature of the

offence are immaterial for consideration

of bail under the Act of 2015. As per

Section 12 of the Act of 2015, an

application for bail is not decided by

reference to classification of offences, as

bailable or non-bailable under the Cr.

P.C. All persons alleged to be in conflict

with law and apparently a child when

apprehended must be released except in

the following three circumstances when

there is reasonable ground for believing

that:-

(i) The released is likely to bring that

person into association with any known

criminal;

P