JUDGMENT 1. - By moving this petition under section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') the petitioner has sought bail through his natural guardian against the F.I.R. No. 132/2008 registered at P.S. Patan. Distt. Sikar for the offence under sections 376 and 323, I.P.C. 2. For the disposal of this petition, necessary facts are that a report was lodged at the instance of complainant Kishori Lal on 27.7.2008 in relation to an incident which took place on 27.7.2008. The accused is a juvenile. The F.I.R. was registered on the report bearing No. 132/2008 in the Police Station Patan Distt. Sikar for the offences under sections 376, 323, I.P.C. An application for grant of bail was moved before the Juvenile Justice Board, Sikar and the same was rejected vide order dated 31.7.2008. An appeal was preferred against the aforesaid order which came to be decided by the learned Sessions Judge, Silkar on 4.8.2008. Hence the present revision petition has been filed. 3. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the Courts below have not taken into consideration the mandatory provisions of the Act. It is contended that the requirement of section 12 of the Act is to enlarge the juvenile on bail unless it is found that on release of a juvenile, he will come in contact with known or unknown criminals. It is contended that juvenile is only of 1 1 years old and both the Courts be low have not assigned proper reasons for declining the bail, therefore, the petitioner's matter requires consideration for bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor contends that in this case there are serious allegations against the petitioner as allegations are to the effect that he committed rape to the minor child aged 7 years. 5. 1 have carefully considered the submissions made before me and also perused the provisions of the Act.It appears that for the protection of juveniles, special Act has been enacted A perusal of section 12 of the Act would indicate that if a juvenile is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a Board, such person shall be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution. It further appears from the perusal of the above section that if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring the accused juvenile in the company of known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice, then only bail to a juvenile can be declined. There are several provisions in the Act, a perusal of which would indicate that what orders are liable to be passed against a juvenile during the course of trial and juvenile's trial is to be separated from other accused persons. A juvenile cannot be sentenced to death or life imprisonment. There is a special procedure for inquiry, appeals, revision etc. in relation to the juvenile. 6. In view of the provisions contained in the Act, the question which arises for consideration is whether the bail was rightly declined to the accused petitioners under section 12 of the Act and the appeal preferred against the order declining bail has been rightly rejected? 7. After carefully examining the provisions o the Act, I do not find that in both the impugned orders no exceptional circumstance as indicted in section 12 of the Act to decline bail to the juvenile is made out. The learned Juvenile Justice Board as well as the learned Appellate Court have not taken into consideration the mandatory provisions contained in the Act particularly section 12 of the Act. What has been stated by both the Courts below is that in the case against the accused petitioner there are serious allegations of committing rape with a minor child and his release would bring him in the company of criminals. I do not find that there is any such material collected during the course of investigation to show that on releasing the petitioner on bail, he will come in the company of known or unknown criminals. In my opinion, the Act being a beneficiary and social oriented legislation should be given full effect by all concern whenever the matter relating to juvenile comes for consider- action before them. 8. The net result of the above discussion is that the revision petition is allowed. The order of the Juvenile Justice Board, Sikar as well as the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar declining bail to the accused petitioner are hereby set aside. 8. The net result of the above discussion is that the revision petition is allowed. The order of the Juvenile Justice Board, Sikar as well as the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sikar declining bail to the accused petitioner are hereby set aside. It is directed that the accused petitioner Santosh Kumar S/o Rameshwal Lal shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond by his natural guardian in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- and a surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Sikar with the stipulation that on all subsequent dates of hearing, he shall appear before the said Court or any other Court during pendency of the inquiry in the case and that the guardian shall keep proper look after of the delinquent children and keep him away from the company of known criminals.Petition Allowed *******