X (Minor) Vs State of Up — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

X (Minor) Vs State of Up — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Revision allowed; both impugned orders (J.J. Board order dated 19.01.2021 and appellate order dated 03.02.2021) set aside; juvenile revisionist to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 1208 of 2020 on his father/natural guardian Guddu @ Ramakant furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of relatives, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur, subject to conditions including guardian's undertakings (no contact with known criminals, no exposure to moral/physical/psychological danger, no criminal activity), no tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses, no adjournment-seeking when witnesses are present, and strict District Probation Officer vigilance with periodical social investigation reports.

Issue for consideration

Whether the juvenile revisionist is entitled to be released on bail in case crime no.1208 of 2020 despite the Juvenile Justice Board and the appellate court having declined bail, having regard to broader principles of law applicable to juvenile bail and the mandate of Section 12(1) of the J.J. Act, 2015. +1 more

Court's answer

The statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. cannot be taken at their face value.

Ratio / Principle

In the court's view there is no material to substantiate the opinion that the juvenile's release will bring him into association with known criminals, expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice.

Key takeaways

The story given in the F.I.R. could not sustain in the investigation, inasmuch as the other named persons were chargesheeted only under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C.ratio¶11
The juvenile has no criminal history and there is no other fact so as to justify his continued detention in the observation home; he had been in incarceration since 25.11.2020, i.e., for more than two years.ratio¶11
In view of the period of incarceration already undergone, the revision is allowed and the judgment and order dated 19.01.2021 of the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur and the order dated 03.02.2021 of the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Ist, Gorakhpur are set aside.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal revision under S.102, Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - juvenile aged 16 years 9 months arraigned in case crime no.1208 of 2020 under Ss.376 (Jha) (N), 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Barhalganj, District Gorakhpur - bail declined by Juvenile Justice Board (order dt.19.01.2021) and affirmed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act) in Criminal Appeal No.16 of 2021 (order dt.03.02.2021) - Held, allowing the revision after incarceration exceeding two years (since 25.11.2020): victim's statements under Ss.161 and 164 Cr.P.C. cannot be taken at face value; the F.I.R. story did not sustain in investigation, co-named persons being chargesheeted only under Ss.504/506 I.P.C.; juvenile has no criminal history; no material that release would result in association with known criminals, exposure to moral, physical or psychological danger, or defeat the ends of justice - bail granted on father's personal bond with two solvent sureties, subject to guardian's undertakings, anti-tampering conditions and DPO supervision with periodical social investigation reports - observations confined to the bail question, no expression on merits; Registry directed to delete the minor's disclosed name from the cause title.

Court No. - 91

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 792 of 2021

Revisionist :- Rahul (Minor) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Revisionist :- Shashank Kumar,Jawahir Yadav,Pradeep Kumar Singh,Priya Ranjan Rai,Shitlesh Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajeev Kumar Singh

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

Heard Sri Jawahir Yadav, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Vinay Kumar Singh holding brief of Sri Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

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 officer of the registry is directed to delete the name of the revisionist-minor from the title of the revision as fed and shown in the data on website and represent him as "Minor through guardian & father Guddu @ Ramakant".

This criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 19.01.2021 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur and order dated 03.02.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act),Ist, Gorakhpur in Criminal Appeal No.16 of 2021 affirming the order of J. J. Board declining bail to the juvenile in case crime no.1208 of 2020, under Sections 376 (Jha) (N), 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Barhalganj, District Gorakhpur.

As per prosecution case, one Manju Devi in collusion with other persons of her family lured a minor daughter of the informant into establishing physical relations with the present juvenile (son of Manju Devi's brother). The F.I.R. was lodged by the informant on 24.11.2020 stating therein that Manju Devi and her family members were habitual of luring young minor girls of the village into having physical relations with others and thereafter exploiting them on the basis of indecent videos. It is also stated in the F.I.R. that the juvenile had physical relations with the minor girl several times on threats to make the videos viral. On the basis of this F.I.R. case crime no.1208 of 2020 was registered and investigated upon. The minor was detained and he was produced before the J.J.Board and was found aged 16 years and nine months on the date occurrence; the victim was found aged about 16 years as per certificate of C.M.O. Statements of witnesses were recorded. Chargesheet was submitted against the present juvenile under Sections 376 (Jha) (N), 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act. Bail of the juvenile was declined and the appeal filed at his behest was also dismissed by the appellate court and the juvenile through his guardian/father before this Court under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

It is contended that besides ignoring broader principles of law as applicable in the matters of bail to the juvenile and mandate of Section 12 (1) of the J.J.Act, 2015, the merits of the case have altogether been ignored

by the courts below. It is contended that the juvenile has been falsely implicated in this case. Initial version made in the F.I.R. could not sustain because it was a fake story. Therefore, the rest of the named persons were chargesheeted under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. only. It is stated that F.I.R. was lodged after deliberations adding certain facts to exaggerate the same and to make it look graver. No evidence at all of making videos and exploiting the victim on the basis thereof, has been found during investigation. It is also contended that the minor is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. In the social investigation report no fact, which can be categorized as adverse to conduct and character of the juvenile, was found. The juvenile is having no criminal and no criminal tendencies, Therefore, he deserves liberty of bail

I went through the impugned orders. It appears that bail to the juvenile has been declined by the J.J.Board and the appellate court on the basis of nature of allegations and DPO report. However, in my view, there no material to substantiate the opinion that his release will bring him in association with known criminal and that he may expose moral, physical or psychological danger and his release will defeat ends of justice. The statements of the victim given under Sections 161Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. cannot be taken at it face value. The story as given in the F.I.R. could not sustain in the investigation inasmuch as against other persons chargesheet was given under Sections 504 and 506 I.P.C. only. The juvenile has no criminal history and no such other fact so as to justify his continued detention in observation home. It may be noted that he has been in incarceration since 25.11.2020 i.e.for more than two years now.

In view of the above, especially, in view of the period of incarceration already undergone, the revision is allowed. The judgment and order dated 19.01.2021 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur and order dated 03.02.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act),Ist, Gorakhpur are hereby set aside.

Let the revisionist, minor "X' through his natural guardian/father Guddu @ Ramakant, resident of village and post Indara, Otopur District Mau be released on bail in Case Crime No. 1208 of 2020, under Sections 376 (Jha) (N), 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Barhalganj, District Gorakhpur upon his father Guddu @ Ramakant furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of his relatives, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur subject to the following conditions:

(i) that the natural guardian/father Guddu @ Ramakant 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;

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

(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;

(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, Gorakhpur on such periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.

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.

Order Date :- 19.12.2022

Asha

Note-copy of the order be sent to concerned office of the Registry for immediate compliance of direction given in para-2 of the order.

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