Allowed

X (Minor) v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2022CRLR/1096/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Revision against the Juvenile Justice Board's order declining bail, the Allahabad High Court set aside the order and released the minor revisionist. The court found no direct evidence against the juvenile, who faced charges of rape and murder, emphasizing the lack of material to sustain detention.

What did the court decide?

The judgment and order dated 27.09.2021 by the Juvenile Justice Board setting apart bail are set aside, and the revisionist is released on bail with conditions.

X (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 92

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1096 of 2022 Revisionist :- X (Minor) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ajay Kumar,Chandrama Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shivaji Singh

¶3

Hon'ble Gajendra Kumar,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State. None for the respondent no. 2 despite service of notice.

¶5

This criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment/order dated 04.02.2022 passed by the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Allahabad in Case Crime No. 134 of 2021, under Sections 302, 34, 376D, 147 and 148 of I.P.C., Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Prayagraj by which, the order of declining the bail was affirmed.

¶6

It is contended on behalf of the revisionist that the order of the Juvenile Justice Board cannot be sustained as it has been passed in disregard to the provisions of Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act without considering the material before the court. It is also contended that there has been absolutely no material to draw the conclusions for declining the bail by the learned Juvenile Justice Board. It is also contended that the FIR in this case has been registered on the basis of suspicion and on the basis of so called last seen evidence. The statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C is wholly doubtful and is not reliable at all to show the complicity of the accused persons in the matter.

¶7

Learned AGA for the State has opposed this Criminal revision.

¶8

I perused the impugned orders in the light of the contention of the revisionist, learned AGA and also the FIR and the material collected during the investigation by the investigating officer. There appears substance in the contention that the complicity of the juvenile accused in this offence is based on the statement made by the deceased brother Sudeep who stated that he came to know from some unknown person that on the night of incident, seven persons were found in suspicion condition they might have been committed the offence. There is no direct evidence against him. It is further submitted that the revisionistapplicant is languishing in jail since 16.02.2021 and there is no previous criminal history against him and he was found to be

¶9

age of below 16 years. There is no justification at all to keep the present revisionist in detention. In view of the above, especially, in view of the period of incarceration, it is a fit case to release the juvenile on bail.

¶10

In view of the above, the revision is allowed . The judgment and order dated 27.09.2021 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Prayagraj, is hereby set aside.

¶11

Let the revisionist, minor "X' through his natural guardian/father 'Y' R/o Village Bhagalpur Gyasuddinpur, Police Station Nagina, District Bijnor be released on bail in Case Crime No. 134 of 2021 under Sections 302, 34, 376D, 147 and 148 of I.P.C., Police Station Dhoomanganj, District-Prayagraj upon his father furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of his relatives, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Prayagraj subject to the following conditions:

¶12

(i) that the natural guardian/father 'Y' will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the juvenile will not be permitted to come into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical or psychological danger and further that the mother will ensure that the juvenile will not indulge in any criminal activity;

¶13

(ii) The revisionist shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;

¶14

(iii) The revisionist through guardian shall also file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court;

¶15

(iv) The District Probation Officer will keep strict vigil on the activities of the revisionist and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board, Prayagraj on such periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.

¶16

Order Date :- 23.9.2022 / A.N. Mishra

¶17

Digitally signed by AMARNATH MISHRA Date: 2022.09.29 17:30:20 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

X (Minor) v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X (Minor) 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of U.P. Vs Om Prakash

MINAUAand Others Vs State of U.P.

Dhundha Vs State of U.P.

Mr.X(Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

X (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sarthak Keshari Vs State of U.P. and Another