Allowed

Abhishek Kaushik v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Feb 2022CRLR/2416/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge allowed a revision challenging the rejection of bail for a juvenile accused of murder. Relying on Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act and precedents, the court held severity of offence is no ground to deny bail to a juvenile.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order rejecting bail set aside; juvenile enrolled on bail by personal bond of mother/guardian and two sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 49

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2416 of 2021

¶3

Revisionist :- Abhishek Kaushik Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Sunil Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mukesh Joshi

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This revision has been preferred by the father of the revisionist for release of the applicant, who is minor, against the judgment and order dated 03.08.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 2021 (Abhishek Kaushik Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of order dated 04.06.2021 passed in Case No. 23A of 2020 (State Vs. Abhishek Kaushik) in Case Crime No. 1391 of 2020, under sections 302/34 IPC, P.S. Majhhola, District Moradabad rejecting the bail of revisionist.

¶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

¶13

manner until he can be brought before a Board.

¶14

(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."

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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 03.08.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 39 of 2021 (Abhishek Kaushik Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of order dated 04.06.2021 passed in Case No. 23A of 2020 (State Vs. Abhishek Kaushik) in Case Crime No. 1391 of 2020, under sections 302/34 IPC, P.S. Majhhola, District Moradabad are hereby set aside.

¶18

In these circumstances, revisionist is entitled for bail.

¶19

Let revisionist- Abhishek Kaushik be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond by the Mother/legal guardian Smt. Sangam Kaushik 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.

¶20

Order Date :- 14.2.2022 SK Srivastava

¶21

Digitally signed by SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.02.16 15:57:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhishek Kaushik v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Kaushik 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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Imran Vs State of Up and Another

Mayank Bana Vs State of U.P.and Another

Urmila Devi Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Shabiha Begum and Another Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Jitendra and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahzabeen Bano Vs Amzad Khan