After considering that the accused is a juvenile and that there is no eye witness to the said incident, Justice Shree Prakash Singh was of the view that the accused can be given the benefit of bail.
“The revisionist was 16 years 8 months and 7 days at the date of the incident and that is evident from the impugned order of the Juvenile Justice Board. Thus, it is established that the revisionist is a juvenile…Further, so far as the merit of the case is concerned, the FIR has been lodged by the grandmother of the revisionist and she is not an eye witness. The other witnesses are also not the eye witnesses in the instant matter and only on hearsay basis,” the order stated.
Source: Barandbench
