Allowed

X v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2022CRLR/2185/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision regarding a bail application by a minor accused in POCSO and IPC cases, the High Court set aside the lower courts' order rejecting bail, granting release to the juvenile subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Revision allowed; lower orders set aside; minor released on bail with father furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties subject to conditions.

X Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2185 of 2022

¶3

Revisionist :- X Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Anil Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Atul Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Atul Singh learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and Sri O.P. Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 23.02.2022 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Prayagraj and order dated 04.04.2022 passed by Additional Special Judge (POCSO Act), court no.2, Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No.26 of 2022 affirming the order of J. J. Board declining bail to the juvenile in case crime no.03 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) and 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Soraon, District Prayagraj.

¶7

As per prosecution case, a minor girl, was kidnapped by the present minor revisionist when she had gone to her school on 31.12.2021 at about 8.30 A.M. in the morning. When she did not return to her house, family members went on search for her but could not know about her whereabouts. The F.I.R. was lodged suspecting the hand of the present juvenile and his friends. The girl was recovered and her statements under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded. She declined her medical examination. After collecting all the oral and documentary evidence chargesheet was submitted against the present juvenile under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) and 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act.

¶8

Finding the alleged accused a minor he was produced before the J.J.Board. In his age determination enquiry he was found aged about 16 years. His bail application was dismissed by the J.J.Board. His appeal challenging the order of J.J.Board was also dismissed.

¶9

It is contended that besides ignoring the settled principle of law applicable in the matters of bail to a juvenile under the J. J. Act, 2015, the courts below did not consider the fact that the victim was found aged 19 years and she expressed his inclination to live with the juvenile and there has not been any unambiguous statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of committing rape on her. It is also contended that in the enquiry proceedings being conducted against the juvenile the so called victim has not supported the prosecution case and has instead exonerated him. It is further contended that the revisionist is in child protection home since last more than 11 months now and that there was nothing in the social investigation report so as to decline him bail.

¶10

I went through the papers on record. The alleged victim was found 19 years by the medical board. In the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she has stated that she has been in relationship with the revisionist for quite sometime and that she wanted to marry him. A copy of the statement given by the victim before the trial court has also been filed

¶11

along with supplementary affidavit which in essence affirms her inclination to marry the present juvenile and has tried to virtually exonerate him from the alleged charge of rape and kidnapping. It is not disputed that the revisionist is in custody since 04.01.2022 i.e. last more than 11 months now and that in the social investigation report nothing adverse was found as to conduct and character of the juvenile. Admittedly he has no criminal history and no criminal antecedents. There is no material to suggest that in case he is released on bail, the ends of justice shall be defeated. Further there is no material to suggest that he may associate with persons of criminal antecedents or that he may be put to moral, physical or psychological danger.

¶12

In view of the above, especially, in view of the period of incarceration already undergone, the revision is allowed. The judgment and order dated 23.02.2022 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Prayagraj and order dated 04.04.2022 passed by Additional Special Judge (POCSO Act), court no.2, Allahabad are hereby set aside.

¶13

Let the revisionist, minor "X' through his natural guardian/father Ramesh Pasi, resident of Malak Chaturi, P.S.Soraon, District Prayagraj be released on bail in Case Crime No.03 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) and 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Soraon, District Prayagraj upon his father Ramesh Pasi 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:

¶14

(i) that the natural guardian/father Ramesh Pasi 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 father will ensure that the juvenile will not indulge in any criminal activity;

¶15

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

¶16

(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;

¶17

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court/J.J.Board shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led, uninfluenced by any finding or observation whatsoever in this order.

¶18

Order Date :- 21.12.2022

¶19

Asha

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ASHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

X v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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. Ichchha Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rohit Agarwal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

X (Minor) Vs State of Up

X (Juvenile) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dileep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Vs State of U.P. and Another