Ravindra Singh, J. - (1.) This revision has been preferred by the revisionist Sachin Sharma being aggrieved by the order 9.8.2004 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T.(P&A) Act/Additional Sessions Judge in Criminal Misc. bail Application No. 664 of 2004 whereby the bail application of the revisionist has been rejected.
(2.) The prosecution story in brief is that in the present case F.I.R. has been lodged by Om Prakash on 7.4.2004 at 8.30 p.m. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 7.4.2004 at about 6.45 p.m. at P.S. Dadri in case crime No. 169 of 2004 under Sections 302/376 I.P.C. The revisionist is not named in the F.I.R. whereas co-accused Sonu is named in the F.I.R. It is said that the co-accused Sonu has disclosed the name of the revisionist during investigation. The deceased was the sister in law of the revisionist. The revisionist took the plea that he is juvenile. The enquiry was made by the learned C.J.M. Ghaziabad and on the basis of the medical examination report, the revisionist was declared juvenile because according to the medical examination report his age was about 17 years. He was declared juvenile by the learned C.J.M. on 3.6.2004. The order-dated 3.6.2004 has been challenged by the first informant Om Prakash in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Gautam Budh Nagar by way of filing a criminal appeal.
(3.) Heard Sri Ashutosh Tripathi, learned Counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and Sri N.L. Pandey learned Counsel for O.P. No. 2.;