- (1.) VINOD Prasad, J. Heard learned Counsel for the revisionist and the learned AGA in support of opposition of this revision.
(2.) SHAKIL Khan, revisionist is involved in Case Crime No. 764 of 2006 for offences under Sections 457, 380, 411 I. P. C. He was declared to be a juvenile but his bail prayer in the aforesaid offence was rejected by Juvenile Justice Board, Bareilly vide its order dated 4-12-2006. The said rejection order was challenged in appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 145 of 2006, which was also dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Bareilly vide his impugned order dated 22-12-2006, hence the present revision for being released on bail. I have heard Dr. Arun Srivastava, learned Counsel for the revisionist in support of this revision and the learned AGA in opposition. Learned Counsel for the revisionist contended that the revisionist is not named in the FIR nor any recovery was made from his possession. He further contended that even according to the prosecution case only the terricot sari is said to have been recovered from the possession of the revisionist. He further contended that the co-accused have already been released on bail and, therefore, the revisionist should also be released on bail. He further contended that there was no report against the revisionist that he has got criminal history and after being released on bail, he will fall in the company of bad person and anti social elements. He submitted that since the revisionist is a juvenile, his further incarceration will not be useful for his over all development and, therefore, he should be released on bail as Juvenile Justice Act is meant for betterment of juvenile offender and to bring them into the main stream of law abiding citizens. Learned Counsel contended that any harsher treatment of the juvenile offender may have a counter productive effect.
(3.) LEARNED AGA on the other hand contended that the recovery of sari has been made at the instance of the applicant and if released on bail, he is likely to fall in the company of bad person. I have gone through the submissions raised by both the sides. From the record, it does not transpire that there is any material which indicate that the revisionist, after being released on bail is likely to fall in the company of bad person. There was no report either form the police station or from the remand officer that the revisionist has got bad antecedent.;