Allowed

Sanjay Singh Yadav v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC17 Nov 2021CRLR/898/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision was filed by a minor revisionist through his guardian against orders rejecting bail. The court held that bail for juveniles under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act cannot be refused merely due to the seriousness of the offence. Relying on precedents, the court allowed the revision, set aside the lower orders, and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Old orders set aside; minor enlargable on bail furnished personal bond by natural guardian and two sureties.

Sanjay Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P.and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 898 of 2021

¶3

Revisionist :- Sanjay Singh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This revision has been preferred through his guardian Suresh revisionist for release of the revisionist, who is minor, against the judgment and order dated 4.2.2021 passed by Sessions Judge, Jhansi in Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 2021 (Sanjay Singh Yadav Vs. State) and also against the order dated 6.1.2021 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Jhansi whereby the bail prayer of the revisionist has been rejected in Case Crime no. 217 of 2020, under sections 498-A, 304-B, 323 IPC and section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mauranipur, District Jhansi.

¶7

Admittedly, the revisionist is a juvenile and special provisions are there for the bail of a juvenile.

¶8

Learned counsel for the revisionist contended that the revisionist has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. did not raise any dispute with regard to the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 provides the provisions as to when bail to a juvenile can be refused.

¶11

"12 Bail of Juvenile.--(1) When any person accused of a bailable or nonbailable offence, and apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or is brought before a board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or fit person but he shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the release 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.

¶12

(2) When such person having been arrested is not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer in-charge of the police station, such officer shall cause him to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed manner until he can be brought before a Board.

¶13

(3) When such person is not released on bail under sub-section(1) by the Board, it shall, instead of committing him to prison, make an order sending him to an observation home or a place of safety for such period during the pendency of inquiry regarding him as may be specified in the order."

¶14

In view of the aforesaid provision, the bail application of the juvenile can be rejected only on the existence of the aforementioned grounds enumerated in Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

¶15

Apart from it in the case of Amit Kumar Vs. State of U.P. [2010 (71) ACC 209 (Alld)] and Naurang (minor) Vs. State of U.P. [2010 (71) ACC 255 (Alld), this Court has expressed the similar view and has granted bail to the juvenile offender in heinous offence. Seriousness of offence is no ground to reject the bail to a juvenile.

¶16

Keeping in view the aforementioned legal position and the fact that in this case no such conditions exists, on the basis of which the bail application of a juvenile can be dismissed, therefore, the revision deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. Order dated 4.2.2021 passed by Sessions Judge, Jhansi in Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 2021 (Sanjay Singh Yadav Vs. State) and also against the order dated 6.1.2021 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Jhansi are hereby set aside.

¶17

In these circumstances, revisionist is entitled for bail.

¶18

Let revisionist- Sanjay Singh Yadav be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond by the natural guardian of Sanjay Singh Yadav and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board to the effect that he will not come into contact with other offenders.

¶19

Order Date :- 17.11.2021

¶20

RPD

Sanjay Singh Yadav v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Singh Yadav v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Kumar (Minor) Vs State of Up and Another

Amit Kumar Sahu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pravin Chauhan and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Kumar (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saif Ali Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Yadav (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another