- (1.) THIS revision application has been filed against the order dated 6.9.2002 whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar dismissed Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2002 for granting bail and affirmed the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar in connection with Deoghar P.S. Case No. 213 of 2001 who rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that he is juvenile.
(2.) MR . A.K. Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner, at the very outset, submitted that he is not named in the first information report and he is juvenile and he has already been remanded to remand home after finding juvenile below the age of 18 years as well as his date of birth has been mentioned as of 1987. It is further argued that when the matter was referred or was pending before the learned Sessions Judge who directed for examination of the petitioner by Medical Board and in the Medical Board, his age was assessed to be aged about 19 years and, on the sole ground, his prayer for bail was rejected. On the other hand, Mr. K.P. Deo, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 contended before me that the petitioner has been examined under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he has given vivid picture of the occurrence and he had actively participated in the crime and the boy who was also minor was abducted/kidnapped for ransom and later on he was done to death.
(3.) HAVING regard to the above facts and circumstances and seriousness of the allegation against the petitioner, the petitioner does not deserve bail.;