Allowed

Minor X through His Guardain/Mother v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Nov 2022CRLR/381/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision, the High Court quashed orders rejecting bail for a juvenile facing charges under IPC sections 323, 504, 506, and 376. The Court held that the lower courts ignored mandatory considerations under the Juvenile Justice Act and found the detention arbitrary, granting bail after deleting the minor's name from the title.

What did the court decide?

Set aside impugned orders and released the juvenile on bail through his guardian with personal bond and undertakings regarding association and tampering.

Minor X through His Guardain/Mother Vs State of U.P. and… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 381 of 2021 Revisionist :- Minor 'X' Through His Guardian/Mother Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Manish Gupta,Arvind Prabodh Dubey,Vinay Kumar

¶3

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶5

It appears that name of the revisionist-juvenile has been disclosed in the memo of revision. This fault from the side of revisionist escaped detection by the Registry. The concerned section of Registry is directed to remove the name of the revisionist-minor from the title of the revision as fed and shown in the data on official website and represent him as " Minor 'X' Through His Guardian/Mother."

¶6

Heard Sri Arvind Prabodh Dubey, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri O.P. Mishra, learned AGA for the State of U.P.

¶7

This criminal revision has been filed challenging the order dated 12.11.2020 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur and further challenging the order dated 10.12.2020 passed by the Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur in Criminal Appeal No. 98/2020 affirming the order of the Juvenile Justice Board declining bail to the juvenile in criminal case arising out of Case Crime No. 0681 of 2020 under Section 323, 504, 506, 376 IPC, Police Station Khorabar, District-Gorakhpur.

¶8

It is contended on behalf of the revisionist that the impugned orders have been passed ignoring the principles of law, as applicable in the matters relating to bail to the juvenile and further ignoring the mandate of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015; the courts below have passed the impugned orders in an arbitrary manner and have drawn conclusions without having sufficient material before them.

¶9

As per prosecution case, a Case Crime No. 0681 of 2020 was registered on the basis of an application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., by the victim herself alleging that she used to visit her sister's house at Gorakhpur where she came in contact with the juvenile. Since, thereafter she started living at Pipra Ghat in her parent's house. The juvenile, on false pretext of marrying her, enticed her away on 05.06.2019 from her house

¶10

to a place at Gorakhpur which was a house of one Akash Gupta. The juvenile, during his stay in that house, forcibly established physical relations with her. When the victim pressurized him to marry her, he kept on avoiding offering different excuses. He also said that he will marry her after arranging sufficient money. However, she was left to find for herself after being put to sexual assault by the juvenile on 10.12.2019. The incident was witnessed by Urmial Devi and Suman and many others of the locality. On the basis of this application, the Case under Sections 323, 504, 506, 376 IPC was registered and investigated upon. During the investigation, the victim refused to undergo a medical examination. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she stated as below:-

¶11

"नन ा म सरर ो ज पप ि तन ा छर ो टट े लन ा ल उ् ቞ 30 शश ै पቌ ኌ ण यर ो ग ् यतन ा मम प ि ढढ ी ललखढ ी नहढ ी हहू ሺ । 1. एक वरर दर ो मपहनन ा प ि हलट े कक ी घटनन ा हश ै मश ै अप ि नढ ी बहन और जढ ी जन ा कट े घर रह रहढ ी थढ ी । वहन ा पनतट े श नन ा म कन ा लडकन ा आतन ा जन ा तन ा थन ा । ककछ पदन बन ा द अप ि नट े मन ा तन ा पप ि तन ा कट े घर आ गयढ ी तर ो वर ो मकझसट े शन ा दढ ी करनट े कट े ललए बर ो लनट े लगन ा । वर ो मकझट े अच ् छन ा जढ ी वन दट े नट े कन ा लन ा लच पदयन ा मश ै उसकट े सन ा थ एक वरर प ि हलट े भन ा ग कर ककसकम ् हढ ी चलढ ी गयढ ी । 2. छछ ः मन ा ह वर ो मकझट े सन ा थ रखन ा मट े रट े सन ा थ रर ो ज शन ा रढ ी ररक सम ् बन ् ध बनन ा तन ा रहन ा जब मश ै शन ा दढ ी करनट े कक ी बन ा त करतढ ी थढ ी तर ो वर ो टन ा ल दट े तट े थन ा । 3. एक पदन वर ो मकझट े मन ा र प ि ढ ी ट कर मट े रट े सन ा थ बलन ा त ् कन ा र कर भन ा ग गयन ा मश ै नम खर ो जनट े कक ी बहहत कर ो पशश कक ी । उसकट े घर

¶12

जन ा नट े प ि र उसनट े जन ा न सट े मन ा रनट े कक ी धमकक ी दढ ी और बर ो लन ा पक कर ो ई ररस ् तन ा नहढ ी हश ै । यहढ ी मट े रन ा ब ् यन ा न हश ै ।"

¶13

The statements as given by Chotte Lal (father of the victim), Suman (real sister of the victim), Urmila (again sister of the victim) and several others have been placed before the Court for perusal. All the witnesses have given statements which essentially do not support the allegations as given in the FIR.

¶14

It is contended on behalf of the revisionist that the victim is aged 30 years and even, if her statement is taken on its face value, she established physical relations with the revisionist at her own free will and desire; the victim is mature and literate and is already married to a person called Nandlal; the juvenile aged much below victim's age has been falsely implicated in this case in a motivated manner; he is in custody since 26.09.2020 i.e., for more than 2 years now; there is nothing found in the social investigation report to bring this case within the scope of exceptions as provided in proviso to Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and that the kind of evidence which has come against the juvenile do not prima facie reveal commission of offence at all.

¶15

I went through the order of the Juvenile Justice Board. The Juvenile Justice Board has passed a very brief order without adverting to any facts and circumstances relating to the

¶16

involvement of the juvenile in this case and without adverting to any other factors which the law mandated to be considered as per the provisions of Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. I also went through the order of the appellate Court. The appellate Court has drawn a conclusion concurring with the conclusions drawn by the Juvenile Justice Board that in case the juvenile is released on bail, he shall be exposed to physical, moral or psychological danger, in my opinion only on the basis of presumptions and probabilities and not on the basis of any material to substantiate the ground.

¶17

The juvenile is in custody since more than 2 years now and he is aged 17 years 2 months. He has no criminal history and no criminal tendencies as per social investigation report. Keeping all the above facts into consideration, I find it a fit case to release the juvenile on bail.

¶18

The revision is allowed . The judgment and order dated 10.12.2020 passed by the Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur and order dated 12.11.2020 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur, are hereby set aside.

¶19

Let the revisionist, minor "X' through his Guardian/mother be released on bail in Case Crime No. 0681 of 2020 under Section 323, 504, 506, 376 IPC, Police Station Khorabar, District-Gorakhpur upon his guardian furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of her relatives, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur subject to the following conditions:

¶20

(i) that the guardian 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 guardian will ensure that the juvenile will not indulge in any criminal activity;

¶21

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

¶22

(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.

¶23

Order Date :- 11.11.2022 Vik/-

¶24

Note- Copy of the order be sent to concerned Section of the Registry for immediate compliance of direction given in Para-1 of the order.

¶25

Digitally signed by VIKRAM GUPTA Date: 2022.11.15 17:00:38 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Minor X through His Guardain/Mother v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Minor X through His Guardain/Mother 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

X Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Umesh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Smt. Najrunnisha Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Sanjay Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj @ Raj Kamal Maurya (Minor) Vs State of U.P.