JUDGMENT : Hon'ble Ravi Malimath, A.C.J. Exemption application (CRMA No. 4010 of 2020) is allowed and the accompanying objections are taken on record. 2. This revision is filed seeking to set aside the order dated 02.09.2020 passed by the trial Court in Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2020, and to release the revisionist on bail. 3. The father of the victim filed a case against the accused, which came to be registered under Section 377 IPC and Section 4/5 of the POCSO Act at P.S. Kichha, Udham Singh Nagar on 10.07.2020. It was alleged in the said complaint that the complainant works as a welder in a factory at SIDCUL, Pantnagar. When in the evening he returned home, his wife told him that their son, namely, the victim was not eating meals due to throat pain. On asking, the victim told that the revisionist inserted his penis into his mouth at the edge of the Gadaria Bag Jungle at around 03:00 P.M. Thereafter, the revisionist was arrested. An application for bail was also moved, which was rejected. Hence, the present revision. 4. The learned counsel for the revisionist contends that the revisionist is a juvenile and hence requires to be enlarged on bail. 5. The same is disputed by Shri J.S. Virk, learned deputy advocate general for the State of Uttarakhand through his statement of objections. 6. The offences alleged against the revisionist are Section 377 IPC and Section 4/5 of the POCSO Act. The victim was aged about 8 years at the time of incident and an unnatural offence has been committed against him. 7. On considering the contentions advanced as well as the material on record, I do not find it expedient to enlarge the revisionist on bail. He is an accused of a heinous offence of Section 377 IPC & Section 4/5 of the POCSO Act, and the age of the victim was only 8 years. 8. Hence, for all these reasons, I do not find any ground to enlarge the revisionist on bail. 9. Consequently, this criminal revision is dismissed.