JUDGMENT : PRITINKER DIWAKER, J. 1. Heard Sri A.K. Verma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Diwaker Singh, learned State counsel for Respondent No. 1. None for respondent No. 2. 2. Present revision has been filed against the order dated 26.09.2017 passed by Sessions Judge, Sitapur in Criminal Appeal No. 57 of 2017 dismissing the appeal preferred by the applicant assailing the order dated 21.08.2017 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Sitapur in Criminal Case No. 322 of 2016. 3. Facts of the case in brief are that on 03.12.2016, the applicant is alleged to have committed rape upon prosecutrix, a major married lady for which, he is in jail since 04.12.2016. Undisputedly, the applicant is minor below 18 years of age. The applicant filed an application before the Principal Magistrate, President, Juvenile Justice Board, Sitapur under Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (for short 'the Act of 2015') for grant of bail, which was rejected on the ground that if the applicant is released on bail, it would likely to bring him into association with known criminals and would expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger. 4. The order passed by the Magistrate was assailed by the applicant by way of filing appeal before the Sessions Judge, Sitapur, which has been dismissed by the order impugned dated 26.09.2017 mainly on the ground that the applicant has committed a serious offence of rape and if he is released on bail this would defeat the ends of justice. Learned appellate court has further held that the judgment of the trial court has been passed after considering all the aspects of the case. The same is based on sound reasons and does not call for any interference. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that both the courts below have completely overlooked the provisions of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 and more particularly the report submitted by the Probation Officer, Annexure-6. He submits that in its report nowhere it has been stated by the Probation Officer that if the applicant is released on bail, he would be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger and that if he comes back to the same atmosphere ends of justice would be defeated. He submits that in its report nowhere it has been stated by the Probation Officer that if the applicant is released on bail, he would be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger and that if he comes back to the same atmosphere ends of justice would be defeated. He submits that if the entire report is seen, the same appears to be in favour of the applicant and it is apparent that the crime has been committed by the applicant on account of poverty. Report reflects that while living in the house, the applicant was helping his father in the agricultural work and does not quarrel with anyone in the village. He submits that there is absolutely nothing adverse in the report of the Probation Officer that if the applicant is released on bail, he would be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger and that the words "he would be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger" have been mentioned in the impugned order just because they are described in the relevant provisions itself. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, however, submits that the application and the appeal of the applicant have rightly been rejected by the Courts below. 7. Before drawing any conclusion regarding the correctness or otherwise of the orders impugned, glance of the relevant provisions of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 becomes necessary, which is reproduced as hereunder for ready reference: "Section 12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law . 7. Before drawing any conclusion regarding the correctness or otherwise of the orders impugned, glance of the relevant provisions of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 becomes necessary, which is reproduced as hereunder for ready reference: "Section 12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law . - (1) When any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or 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 or placed under the supervision of a probation officer or under the care of any fit person: Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring that 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. (2) When such person having been apprehended is not released on bail under subsection (1) by the officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause the person to be kept only in an observation home in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board. (3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety, as the case may be, for such period during the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as may be specified in the order. (4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfill the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail." 8. (4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfill the conditions of bail order within seven days of the bail order, such child shall be produced before the Board for modification of the conditions of bail." 8. In the present case, in compliance of the provisions of the Act of 2015 the report of the Probation Officer was called by the Juvenile Justice Board and following are the main points in the said report: */keZ ds izfr n`f"Vdks.k %& ldkjkRed lekftd vkSj vkfFkZd izkfLFkfr %& lkekftd ,oa vkfFkZd fLFkfr fuEu oxhZ;A orZeku thou&fuokZgu dh ifjfLFkfr;ka %& vipkjh fd'kksj jktdh; lEizs{k.k x`g y[kuÅ esa fu:) gSA vU; egRoiw.kZ rF;] ;fn dksbZ gks %& oknh i{k xkao dk jgus okyk gSA ,oa nksuks ,d nwljs dks tkurs FksA ckyd dh vknrsa %& ?kj esa vuq'kklu ds izfr ckyd dh jk; ,oa izfrfdz;k & lkekU;A ckyd ds jkstxkj ds O;kSjs ;fn dksbZ gks rks %& dksbZ ugh crk;k x;kA vk; ds O;kSjs rFkk vk; mi;ksx djus dk rjhdk %& ughA ckyd ds f'k{kk ds O;kSjs %& vipkjh fd'kksj ds ckjs es crk;k x;k fd fd'kksj d{kk 05 ikl gSA ckyd ds izfr d{kk ds lkfFk;ksa dh vfHko`fRr ¼joS;k½ %& ckyd ds izfr f'k{kdks dh vfHko`fRr¼joS;k½ %& lkekU; crk;h x;hA Ldwy NksM+us ds dkj.k %& vipkjh fd'kksj ds ifjokj dh vkfFkZd fLFkfr fuEu gksus ds dkj.k f'k{k.k dk;Z vo:) gksuk crk;k x;kA fiNyk Ldwy tgkW v/;;u fd;k %& O;kolkf;d izf'k{k.k ;fn dksbZ gks rks %& dksbZ ugh crk;k x;kA ckyd ds lkfFk;ksa vkSj mudk izHkko %& ge mez ds ckydks ds lkFk mBuk&cSBku crk;k x;kA iM+ksl vkSj iM+ksfl;ksa dh fjiksVZ %& vkl&ikl ds yksxks }kjk okrkZ ds nkSjku crk;k x;k gS fd vipkjh fd'kksj ?kj ij jg dj firk dk [ksrh es gkFk cVkrk FkkA vkSj xkao es fdlh ls dksbZ >xM+k ugh djrk FkkA tk¡p dk ifj.kke HkkoukRed rF; %& lkekU;A 'kkjhfjd n'kk %& vk;q ds vuqlkj Bhd crk;h x;hA cqf)eRrk %& vk;q ds vuqlkj Bhd crk;h x;hA lkekftd vkSj vkfFkZd rF; %& fuEuLrjh; xzkeh.k thou ;kiuA /kkfeZd rF; %& lkekU;A leL;kvksa ds bafxr dkj.k %& izdj.k dk fo'ys"k.k ftlls ;g irk pys fd vipkjh O;ogkj dSls fodflr gqvk %& LFkyh; tkWp ds le; fd'kksj ds ekrk firk o fuoklhx.k xzke csgVh dk u;kiqjok etjk jkedq.N Fkkuk ekuiqj ftyk lhrkiqj mifLFkr Fks xzke okfl;ks ls gqbZ okrkZ ds nkSjku tkudkjh es vk;k fd fd'kksj dk LokHkko Bhd Fkk fd'kksj us d{kk 5 rd i 9. A bare perusal of the said report makes it clear that it is nowhere mentioned in it that if the applicant is released on bail, he would come into association with any known criminal or it would expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. Rather the report says that the offence might have committed by the applicant because of his poor financial condition. 10. Perusal of Section 12 of the Act of 2015 makes it clear that ordinarily, the bail has to be granted to the juvenile and the same can be rejected only when it appears to the court concerned that either of three conditions laid down in this provision are in existence. The orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and the Sessions Court go to show that while passing the same both the courts below have not at all considered the report of Probation Officer in a correct manner and rejected the application of the applicant for his release on bail in a mechanical manner simply by reproducing few words of Section 12 of the Act of 2015. Further the courts below have presumed many things of their own, which is not part of record of Probation Officer. These aforesaid two orders passed by the Courts below do not stand on the touchstone of the relevant legal provisions. 11. From the material on record it is also apparent that no proper reason whatsoever has been assigned by the Juvenile Justice Board on the basis of which, application of the applicant could be rejected. Rather the report of the Probation Officer is in favour of the applicant, which clearly says that the family atmosphere of the applicant is not adverse. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the report of the Probation Officer, the present revision is allowed. Orders impugned are hereby set aside. 13. The applicant is directed to be released on bail of his guardian or parent furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice Board. The applicant is directed to appear before the said Board on all the dates as are given to him. 14. 13. The applicant is directed to be released on bail of his guardian or parent furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice Board. The applicant is directed to appear before the said Board on all the dates as are given to him. 14. It has been informed that there is no progress in the trial and even the statement of the prosecutrix has not been recorded. If this is correct, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously because keeping pending such trial for long period would defeat the ends of justice and various provisions of law. 15. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial court would be at liberty to decide the trial strictly in accordance with law on the basis of evidence so adduced by the parties.