Sahim Akhtar vs State Of Jharkhand

This revision is directed against the order dated 07.10.2020, passed by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Deoghar in Cr. Appeal (Juvenile) No.43 of 2020, whereby the prayer for bail of the petitioner has been rejected in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No.25 of 2020, registered under Sections 403, 405, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(B) (C) (D) and Section 84 (C) of the Information and Technology Act.

Heard the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the objection raised by learned A.P.P. It appears that the case of the petitioner stands on better footing to that of co-accused Sanjay Kumar Verma and Sunil Kumar Ramani @ Sunil Rawani who have been granted bail in B.A. Nos. 6298 of 2020 and 7687 of 2020 vide order dated 17.10.2020 and 04.11.2020 by co-ordinate Benches.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Deoghar, in connection with Cyber P.S. Case No.25 of 2020, on the condition that one of the bailors shall be a close relative/natural guardian who shall give an undertaking (i) to ensure the good behaviour of the petitioner, (ii) to ensure that the juvenile petitioner does not come in contact with any anti-social elements, and (iii) produce the juvenile/petitioner before the Probation Officer as and when directed by the Board.

In case of any adverse report, the Board is at liberty to pass necessary order in accordance with the provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015. The petitioner/juvenile shall be present before the court, as and when directed, and co-operate in the enquiry proceeding.

With the aforesaid direction, the revision is, hereby, allowed.