Pankaj Bhandari, J.:— No one has put in appearance on behalf of the parties.
2. In “Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003) 2 SCC 45, Apex Court has held that lawyers have no right to go on strike or to give a call for boycott of Courts. Calls given by Bar Association or Bar Council for such purpose cannot require the Court to adjourn the matters. In “Krishnakant Tamrakar v. State Of Madhya Pradesh .” decided by the Apex Court on 28.3.2018 The Apex Court has held that strike by advocates is in violation of law laid down by the Apex Court and the same tantamounts to contempt. The Apex Court has further held that the office bearers are liable to be removed from the office for passing resolution for strike. In view of the judgment of Apex Court in Ex.Captain Harish Uppal v. Union of India and “Krishnakant Tamrakar v. State Of Madhya Pradesh .”, since the advocates are abstaining from work, this Court deems it proper to pass order on merits.
3. Petitioner through his natural guardian father has preferred this revision petition aggrieved by order dated 24.12.2018 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Bharatpur, whereby bail application preferred by the petitioner was rejected and against order dated 05.01.2019 passed by Special Judge, Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act Cases, 2012 and Protection of Child Right Commission Act, 2005, No. 1, Bharatpur, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected.
4. From perusal of the record, it is revealed that co-accused has been given regular bail by the High Court. Recovery of stolen article has been effected from the co-accused. Challan has already been presented in the Court. There was nothing before the court below to have come to the conclusion that release of petitioner would bring him in association with known-criminals or release of petitioner would defeat the end of justice.
5. In view of the same, I deem it proper to allow the revision petition.
6. It is directed that petitioner be released on bail, provided his natural guardian father, furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- alongwith two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice board with the stipulation that he shall produce the petitioner before the concerned Juvenile Justice Board on all dates, till the enquiry of trial is completed. His natural guardian father shall ensure that the juvenile in conflict with law maintains good conduct and behaviour.