(1) Hon'ble Shri Kant Tripathi, J.-Heard Sri AP Tiwari, learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned AGAand perused the record.

(2) It appears that the revisionist is an accused in Case Crime No. 219 of 2010 (Mohd. Yunush v State of U.P.) under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC, P.S. Gagha, District Gorakhpur and has already been declared as juvenile. He moved an application for bail but the Juvenile Justice Board rejected the bail prayer. The appeal filed by him has also been dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide its judgement and order dated 3.5.2010 in Juvenile Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2010.

(3) The respondent No. 1 has filed a counter-affidavit.

(4) The learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that in view of the fact that the revisionist is a juvenile, the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (in short "the Act"), will apply and the Code of Criminal Procedure will not be applicable in respect of the bail matter. Only Section 12 of the Act is applicable, which provides:

"Section 12: Bail of juvenile.-(1) When any person accused of a bailable or non- bailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety but he shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into assoiation with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. (2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as may be specified in the order."

(5) A perusal of Section 12 of the Act reveals that a juvenile is entitled to bail notwithstanding the seriousness of the crime. His bail can be refused only when it is shown that there are reasonable grounds for believing that his release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. There is no allegation against the revisionist that in the event of his release on bail he will come into the association with any known criminal or he will be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger. It appears that the learned lower Courts refused to bail out the revisionist on the ground that the ends of justice would be defeated on his release on bail.

(6) The learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the report of the District Probation Officer is not based on any material, therefore, none of the exceptions provided in Section 12 of the Act is made out in this case. Even the report of the concerned Police Station, which was not based on any material, was not relevant.

(7) It was next submitted that there is no evidence on record to show that the revisionist, if released on bail will come in association with any known criminal or he will be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger and also that the ends of justice would be defeated. Therefore, the refusal of bail was not proper.

(8) Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that Section 12 of the Act is fully attracted in this case, therefore, it would be just and expedient to enlarge the revisionist Mohd. Yunush on bail.

(9) The revision is allowed. The impugned orders orde

r dated 20.4.2010 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur Court as well as the order dated 3.5.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur in the aforesaid case are hereby quashed. (10) Let the revisionist Mohd. Yunush be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond to be executed by his guardian and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur.