JUDGMENT P.K. Lohra, J. - Petitioner-juvenile has preferred this revision petition under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short, 'Act of 2015') read with Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. to assail order dated 14th of February, 2018, passed by Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Cases), Bikaner (for short, 'learned appellate Court'), rejecting his appeal under Section 101 of the Act of 2015 and thereby upholding order dated 6th of February 2018 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Bikaner (for short, 'learned Board'). 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that pursuant to investigation into FIR No.30/2018, registered at Police Station Bichhawal, District Bikaner, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 447, 323, 147, 148 and 149 IPC, petitioner and other accomplices namely Chetan Prakash, Prem Panwar and Vazid Khan were apprehended but barring the petitioner all other were major, and therefore, investigation of the petitioner was segregated being juvenile. Eventually, upon completion of investigation, petitioner was charge-sheeted before learned Board for offences under Sections 302, 307, 341, 325, 323, 447 and 34 IPC and other accused persons were charge-sheeted before the competent criminal Court. After apprehending the petitioner, he was sent to Observation Home. 3. On behalf of petitioner, his natural guardian mother applied for bail before the learned Board but the same was declined by citing the reason of seriousness and criminal delinquency. Feeling dismayed with the order of learned Board, petitioner approached learned appellate Court but his that effort also proved abortive. 4. I have heard authorized representative of petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and perused impugned orders as well as scanned the charge-sheet and other allied papers. 5. While it is true that the delinquencies attributed to petitioner-juvenile are of grave and serious nature but the evidence collected during investigation indicates that the allegations of inflicting injury to deceased and injured against the petitioner are omnibus and the real assailants were other accomplices. It appears that the petitioner being juvenile, other accomplices enticed him for his involvement in this grave offence. 6. It is also borne out from the challan papers that there is no recovery of any weapon of offence from the petitioner. 7. The legal position is no more res-integra that bail plea of a juvenile cannot be thwarted simply on account of seriousness of criminal delinquencies. 6. It is also borne out from the challan papers that there is no recovery of any weapon of offence from the petitioner. 7. The legal position is no more res-integra that bail plea of a juvenile cannot be thwarted simply on account of seriousness of criminal delinquencies. The Board, while considering bail application of a child in conflict with law, cannot be guided by an embargo envisaged under Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law for the time being in force to decline bail to a juvenile. The only exception to the said rule is proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 which reads as under:- "Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring hat person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the person's release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision." 8. Upon examining the materials available on record as well as report of of the Probation Officer, which clearly indicates that earlier the petitioner was not involved in any criminal activities and the Probation Officer has also opined that if the petitioner is allowed to associate with his family, it will be in his best interest for his reformation. In view thereof, I am afraid, serious criminal delinquencies of the petitioner, has not incurred any disqualification for grant of bail within the four corners of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act of 2015. 9. Upshot of above discussion is that instant revision petition is allowed. Impugned orders passed by both the Courts below are quashed and set aside and as a consequence thereof, petitioner- juvenile, Mahipal Singh S/o Shri Alsi Singh, is ordered to be released on bail provided requisite bail bond is furnished by his guardian - mother Smt. Suman Kanwar, in a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Bikaner with further stipulation that he shall make sincere endeavour to present juvenile (petitioner) before the Board on each and every date of hearing and as and when he is called.