Allowed

Saurabh @ Saurabh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC12 Apr 2018CRLR/496/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed criminal revision against Juvenile Justice Board order rejecting bail for a juvenile accused of POCSO violations. Court granted bail finding no mandatory ground for rejection under JJ Act and citing high probability of false implication.

What did the court decide?

Revisionist enlarged on bail furnishing personal bond of parents/legal guardians and two sureties.

Saurabh @ Saurabh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 28 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 496 of 2016

¶2

Revisionist :- Saurabh @ Saurabh Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Pradeep Kumar Rai,Ashok Kumar Yadav,Kamal Krishna,Saroj Kumar Dubey,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mithilesh Kumar Gupta,N.Kumar

¶3

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for revisionist, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for State.

¶5

This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 04.02.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.5, Ghazipur in Juvenile Criminal Appeal No. 02/2016 (Saurabh @ Saurabh Kumar Vs. State of U.P.), dismissing the appeal against order dated 12.01.2016 passed by Juvenile Justice Board. By order dated 12.01.2016, Juvenile Justice Board has rejected the bail application of juvenile Saurabh Kumar in Case Crime No. 857/2015 under Sections 376, 452, 506, 504, 427 and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Karanda, District Ghazipur.

¶6

As per prosecution version, on 27.08.2015 at about 6:00 p.m.,complainant Deena and his wife were working in the field. The two minor daughters of complainant, were playing alone in their home. At that time, his neighbour revisionist (Saurabh) entered in the house and committed rape with prosecutrix aged about 9 years.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for revisionist that there exists no ground as specified in Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015 for rejection of bail application. There is no evidence against revisionist. F.I.R. has been lodged after twenty days of alleged occurrence without explanation. As per report of District Probation Officer, Ghazipur allegations levelled against revisionist is false and due to enmity, revisionist has been falsely implicated in the case. In medical report, there is no internal or external injury to the prosecutrix. The age of revisionist is below 16 years and he is in Protection and Care of Juvenile Home since 12.01.2016.

¶8

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and contended that there is no any illegality in the order passed by courts below.

¶9

In the report submitted by District Probation Officer, Ghazipur it is mentioned that revisionist was not involved in the incidence and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. 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.

¶10

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that applicant deserves to be released on bail.

¶11

Accordingly, this criminal revision is allowed, impugned judgments/orders passed by the courts below are hereby set aside.

¶12

The revisionist Saurabh @ Saurabh Kumar (Juvenile) be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 11/2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 857/2015, under Sections 376, 452, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. and section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station- Karanda, District Ghazipur 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 .

¶13

Order Date :- 12.4.2018 Sharad/-

Saurabh @ Saurabh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh @ Saurabh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Gulafsa @ Chandani and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. and 4 Others

Sudhakar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Ravi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Maya Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Km. Saloni Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Kumar Vs State and Others