JUDGMENT : 1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. 2. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.05.2022 passed by the court of Additional Judicial Commissioner-IV-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Ranchi in Cr. Appeal No. 51 of 2022, whereby and where under the learned appellate court confirmed the order of Juvenile Justice Board dated 31.03.2022 passed in Kanke P.S. Case No. 203 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3628 of 2021 registered u/s 302/34 of IPC and rejected the Cr. Appeal No. 51 of 2022 denying the prayer of bail of the petitioner. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and the learned Addl.P.P. for the State. 4. A quarrel took place between the petitioner and the two co-accused persons along with the deceased who was the staff of the shop of the informant under which the said staff got injured and thereafter he was taken to Kanke Nursing Hospital where he succumbed to the injury, thereby a case was registered vide Kanke P.S. Case No. 203 of 2021 and registered on 10.09.2021. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the record of this case. 6. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is below 16 years of age and his enquiry is going on in the Juvenile Justice Board at Ranchi. It has been pointed out that the petitioner is in jail since 12.09.2021 and the maximum punishment provided after the enquiry is three years. 7. It has been pointed out that during course of the inquiry of the case going on in the Board, two witnesses P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 who are the said to have been eye witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution and they have turned hostile and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. 8. The photocopy of the depositions of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 have been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit. 9. Further it has been submitted no specific allegation has been alleged in the FIR and no any overact has been attributed against him. 8. The photocopy of the depositions of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 have been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit. 9. Further it has been submitted no specific allegation has been alleged in the FIR and no any overact has been attributed against him. Further it has been pointed out that by the order of the court the latest social investigation report has been called for form the observation of home where the petitioner is confined and the counsellor Smt. Rakhi Kumari has given her opinion that there is a drastic change in the behavior of the petitioner and the petitioner is very submissive and having cordial relationships with the other inmates of the observation home. Further, it has also been opined that by the counselor that he is aware of his career and he wanted to pursue his education and he wanted to come into main stream of the society and it is also come into the report that there is no criminal history against him and his relationship is respectful and obedient with parents and family members and with elders also. He is very gentle and no criminal behaviors has been noticed against this petitioner and due to negligence of the parents he is alleged to have been involved in such types of offence. 10. On the other hand learned counsel for the informant opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is charged for heinous offence inter-alia u/s 302of IPC and two accused persons facing the trial in the regular court of law and therefore he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. It has further been pointed out that the learned court below while rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner has opined that this petitioner being the child is living in a very poor condition and lack of proper care of child, therefore, therefore his release on bail will be pernicious to the society. 11. It is found that the report received form the observation home is very conducive for releasing the petitioner on bail. From the report it appears that he has no criminal history and, therefore, the possibility of coming the petitioner in association of the known criminal is very remote. 11. It is found that the report received form the observation home is very conducive for releasing the petitioner on bail. From the report it appears that he has no criminal history and, therefore, the possibility of coming the petitioner in association of the known criminal is very remote. Further, the report also speaks that the counselor has opined that the petitioner is having a good relationship with his peers in the observation home and he wanted to pursue his education and career and wanted to come into main stream of the society also and therefore, under the circumstances it is found that his continuation in the observation home as an accused will be more harmful and there is possibility of detrimental impact on his mental, moral, physical and psychological aspect and therefore for the ends of justice this Court finds that it is just and fair to give one opportunity to the petitioner to come into main stream of the society by releasing him on bail. 12. Accordingly the petitioner is directed to enlarge on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned J.J. Board at Ranchi in connection with Kanke P.S. case No. 203/2021 registered u/s 302/34 of IPC and subject to the condition (i) one of the bailers shall be parents either mother or the father, (ii) mother and father will give separate undertaking that they will take proper care of the of the petitioner and pursue his education and (iii) further any other condition or conditions as the learned court of Juvenile Justice Board may deem fit and proper. 13. Let a copy of the order be sent to the Secretary, DLSA, Ranchi to do the needful to facilitate the parents of the child to get him admitted in the school for his proper further education and also counseling of the child as per his need so that he could continue his education and join into the main stream of society. 14. Accordingly, the judgment/order dated 25.05.2022 passed by the A.J.C.-IV-cum-Special Judge POCSO at Ranchi in Cr. Appeal No. 51 of 2022 is set aside. The Cr. Revision is allowed.