- (1.) I have heard Sri R.P.Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Amarjeet Singh Rakhara, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
(2.) The revisionist was admittedly declared as juvenile in Case Crime No.19 of 2013 under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 396, 307, 323, 504, 506, 382, 353 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, relating to police station Hathigawan, District Pratapgarh.
(3.) The submission on behalf of the revisionist is that after the revisionist was declared as juvenile, he applied for bail before the Juvenile Justice Board but by the order dated 02.12.2015, his prayer for bail was refused by the Board on the ground that the guardian of the revisionist had no effective control over him and he committed the crime in a fit of anger. In these circumstances, if the revisionist is released on bail, he may be exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger and his release would defeat the ends of justice.;