JUDGMENT 1. - This petition has been filed against the order dated 30.10.2010, passed by the Sessions Judge, Baran whereby the learned Judge has confirmed the order dated 22.10.2010, passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Board, Baran by which he had dismissed the bail application filed by the petitioner, the petitioner has challenged the same before this Court. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 26.9.2010, the complainant, Rukmani Bai, lodged a report at Police Station Chhipabarodh. In which she has stated that on the said day at about 7-8 P.M., she was alone at home, his husband was not present, he went in village due to some reasons. When she was sitting Varandh, suddenly the accused-petitioner entered in her house and caught her hand without consent, he dragged in her house and shut the door, she cried but nobody came for rescue her, by force he got down her on earth and committed rape. Thereafter, she lodged a F.I.R. against the petitioner. The accused-petitioner filed a bail application before the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Board, Baran. However, vide order dated 22.10.2010, the learned Magistrate dismissed the same. Against the order dated 22.10.2010, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 52 of Juvenile Justice act, 2000 before the appellate Court. However, vide order dated 30.10.2010, the learned appellate Court dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order dated 22.10.2010 (annexure-1) and the order dated 30.10.2010 (annexure-2), the petitioner has filed this revision petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the accused-petitioner is in judicial custody since long. He is not a habitual offender and his age is between 10 to 12 years, while the prosecutrix is more than 22 years, how the petitioner can committed rape upon her. The learned counsel has also relied upon a judgment of Rahul Mishra v. State of M.P., Cri.L.J. 2001 page 214 M.P. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. 5. The learned counsel has also relied upon a judgment of Rahul Mishra v. State of M.P., Cri.L.J. 2001 page 214 M.P. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer. 5. In view of above, this revision petition is allowed after quashing and setting aside the order dated 22.20.2010 and 30.10.2010 and it is ordered that the petitioner, Banwari S/o Shri Ram Ratan, shall be released on bail, provided the furnishes a personal bond in the sum of 25,000/- with two suretes of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board for his appearance before the Juvenile Justice Board as and when called upon to do so.Revision allowed. *******