- (1.) This revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 17.03.2015, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Mau in Criminal Appeal No.3 of 2015 (Ranjeet Yadav versus State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No.485 of 2014, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 and 5/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Haldharpur, District Mau, whereby the order dated 09.01.2015 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, rejecting the bail application of revisionist / juvenile has been affirmed and the appeal filed by juvenile has been dismissed.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A.
(3.) According to the F.I.R. (Annexure-1) lodged by the father of the prosecutrix, on 03.06.2014 at about 8.00 P.M. when his daughter had gone to the fields to attend the natural call, the revisionist enticed her away with the help of co accused Kamlesh. The father of revisionist, co accused Bahadur, despite having knowledge about the occurrence, did not tell anything, to the informant.;