Allowed

Abhishek Chauhan v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC12 May 2022CRLR/1144/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal revision filed by a juvenile offender. Holding that stringent bail restrictions under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act apply only when release poses danger to society, the court quashed conflicting bail rejection orders. The revisionist, detained for over a year with no criminal record, was ordered to be released on personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

The revisionist Abhishek Chauhan to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of his father.

Abhishek Chauhan Vs State of U.P and Another — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1144 of 2021

¶3

Revisionist :- Abhishek Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Anup Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Pleadings have already been exchanged between the parties.

¶6

Heard Sri Anup Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The present revision has been filed against the judgement and order dated 17.2.2021 passed by Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur dismissing the Crl. Appeal No. 11 of 2021 filed against the order dated 7.1.2021 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur and confirming the aforesaid order dated 7.1.2021 passed by Pradhan Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur whereby the bail application of revisionist filed in case crime No. 633 of 2020, under Sections 364A, 302, 201, 120B, 34, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Pipraich, District Gorakhpur has been rejected.

¶8

On 21.10.2020, revisionist has been declared juvenile by Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur (in short, 'Board'). On 7.1.2021 his bail application was rejected by Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur. Thereafter revisionist preferred a revision before Sessions Court, Gorakhpur against bail rejection order passed by the Board dated 7.1.2021 which was also dismissed by the Sessions Court on 17.2.2021. By way of present revision, revisionist challenged both the orders dated 7.1.2021 passed by the Board and 17.2.2021 passed by the lower revisional court.

¶9

Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that revisionist is admittedly juvenile, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail in view of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short, the Act). On merit, he submitted that revisionist was not named in the FIR and allegation against the revisionist that in the crime his scooty was used in crime and further the ransom was demanded from his mobile.

¶10

He also submitted that the report of Probation Officer is also not against the revisionist and during inquiry, it revealed that revisionist was not having any criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the revisionist further contended that revisionist is in jail since 28.7.2020. Therefore, both the impugned orders are liable to be set aside and revisionist be released on bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA submitted that there are serious allegation against the applicant and during investigation it reveals that the scooty of the revisionist was used in abduction of the victim who was later on, murdered and it is a case in which ransom was demanded and in the entire incident, there was active participation of the revisionist. He further submitted that when the revisionist was apprehended then it revealed that his mobile was also used for demand of ransom and the matter is of Section 364-A, 302 IPC in which a lad of 14 years have lost his life and ransom was also demanded, therefore, no leniency should be extended in favour of the revisionist and both orders under challenge are reasoned one and there is no illegality in impugned orders. However, learned AGA could not dispute the fact that revisionist is juvenile and he is in jail since 28.7.2020.

¶12

I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶13

Admittedly, revisionist is juvenile and he is in jail since 28.7.2020 having no criminal antecedents. As per Section 12 of the Act, juvenile can only be refused to be released on bail 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 his release would defeat the ends of justice. In the present case, there is no material on record on the basis of which it can be said that after release, revisionist would come into association with any known criminal or will expose to said person to moral, physical or psychological danger and revisionist is in jail since 28.7.2020 and still his trial before the Board is pending, therefore, considering his long detention, he should be released on bail.

¶14

In view of the above, the revision is allowed . Both the impugned orders dated 7.1.2021 and 17.2.2021 passed by the Board and lower revisional court are hereby quashed .

¶15

Let the revisionist - Abhishek Chauhan through his natural guardian father-Ram Lavat be released on bail in the aforesaid criminal case and be given into his custody on furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of his relatives each in like amount to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board concerned on the following conditions.

¶16

(i)That, father-Ram Lavat/natural guardian of the revisionist will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail, the juvenile will not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known or unknown criminal or exposed to any moral or physical danger and will not indulge in any criminal activity and he will make best effort for improvement of juvenile's carrier.

¶17

(ii)That the revisionist and his aforesaid father/ natural guardian shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.

¶18

Order Date :- 12.5.2022

¶19

Ankita

¶20

Digitally signed by ANKITA SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.05.14 15:57:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhishek Chauhan v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Chauhan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjeev and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nikhil Mohan Pursnani Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Washeem Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Agrawal Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. and Another

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajeshwari Tewari and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another