Rev against bail rejection in sexual assault case involving juvenile. Held no grounds for rejection under JJ Act; ordered release on personal bond.
Revision allowed; impugned orders set aside. Juvenile released on bail on furnishing personal bond.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3239 of 2016
Revisionist :- Manjesh Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Pradeep Kumar,Dinesh Kumar Pandey,Manu Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravindra Prakash Srivasta,Vineet Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for revisionist and learned A.G.A. for State.
This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 28.09.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Maharajganj in Criminal Appeal No. 42/2016 (Manjesh Gupta Vs. State of U.P.), dismissing the appeal against order dated 02.09.2016 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Maharajganj. Vide order dated 02.09.2016 bail application of revisionist was rejected in Case Crime No. 307/2016, under Sections 376, 366A, 504 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Nichlaul, District Maharajganj.
As per prosecution version, on 02.06.2016 at about 6:00 p.m. prosecutrix was going to attend the call of nature. On the way, revisionist Manjesh Gupta took away the prosecutrix aged about 16 years at his residence on the pretext to marry with her, where revisionist committed rape on her at his residence.
Learned counsel for revisionist contended that there exists no ground as specified in Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 for rejection of bail application of revisionist. Medical evidence does not support the rape with the prosecutrix. As per medical report, prosecutrix was major at the time of occurrence. Revisionist is in Protection and Care of Juvenile Home since 12.06.2016. Revisionist has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity and there is no criminal antecedent against revisionist. Learned Trial Court has passed the impugned order, which is not sustainable.
Learned A.G.A. contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by courts below.
The report of District Probation Officer, Maharajganj has no substance. There is no evidence or material on record to show that the release of juvenile is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that revisionist deserves to be released on bail.
Accordingly, this criminal revision is allowed, impugned judgments/orders passed by the courts below are hereby set aside.
The revisionist Manjesh Gupta (Juvenile) be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 307/2016, under Sections 376, 366A, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Nichlaul, District Maharajganj on furnishing a personal bond by either of his parents and in absence by his legal guardians and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice Board.
Order Date :- 16.5.2018 Sharad/-
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Manjesh Gupta
State of U.P.
Umesh Chandra Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
