Allowed

X Minor v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Dec 2022CRLR/921/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal revision allowed granting bail to a 17-year-old juvenile accused of narcotics offences. The High Court set aside the Juvenile Justice Board's order denying bail, finding no real substance for its restrictive inference given the juvenile's clean record and the period of incarceration. Bail granted with specific conditions and a disclaimer regarding the merits of the trial.

What did the court decide?

Sibus imczed Judgment dated 22.11.2021 and order dated 11.01.2022 were set aside; juvenile released on bail via father and sureties with specified conditions.

X Minor Vs State of U.P. and Another — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 921 of 2022

¶3

Revisionist :- "X" Minor

¶4

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Saurabh Tripathi,Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma,Sanjay Kumar Dubey,Sohit Prakash Sharma

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.

¶7

Order on Criminal Misc. (Amendment) Application No.05 of 2022

¶8

Heard Sri Sri Pankaj Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant-revisionist. Amendment application has been moved with the prayer to amend the title of the revision deleting the name of the juvenile and representing him with alphabet "X" minor.

¶9

Sufficient ground is shown in the affidavit filed in support of the amendment application.

¶10

The amendment application is allowed.

¶11

Let amendment be carried out immediately.

¶12

Concerned Section of the registry is directed to correct the cause list and the data on Website accordingly after amendment.

¶13

Order on Criminal Revision

¶14

Heard Sri Pankaj Sharma, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶15

This criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 22.11.2021 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Hathras and order dated 11.01.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), First Hathras, District Hathras in Criminal Appeal No.23 of 2021 affirming the order of J. J. Board declining bail to the juvenile in case crime no.439 of 2021, under Section 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Sadabad, District Hathras.

¶16

It is contended on behalf of the revisionist that the revisionist is 17 years old boy and has been falsely implicated in this case by the police for motivated reasons; even if the facts mentioned in the F.I.R. are taken on its face value, it is revealed that seven persons were found carrying illegal ganja in a truck; it is stated that when the vehicle was intercepted, all the persons tried to flee but they were apprehended; it is contended that narcotics was recovered from the joint possession of all the accused persons being carried in a vehicle; hence, it cannot be said that same was recovered from the possession of the accused specifically. It is also contended that co-accused persons namely Neeraj Kumar @ Deepak,

¶17

Sunil, Jitendra and Ramveer who had a case similar to that of this juvenile, have been granted regular bail by other Benches of this Court vide orders dated 11.02.2022, 08.03.2022, 28.03.2022 and 13.07.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos.3932 of 2022, 53839 of 2021, 56223 of 2021 and 26421 of 2022 respectively. However, present revisionist is still detained since last one year because of intricacies of the Juvenile Justice Act.

¶18

It is also contended that the juvenile-revisionist has no criminal history and no criminal tendencies. Nothing adverse has been mentioned in the District Probation Officer report, hence, his detention is not in consonance with the mandate of Section 12(1) of the J.J.Act.

¶19

I went through both the impugned orders. In my view, there was no real substance before the J.J.Board/appellate court for drawing inferences as have been drawn by them bringing this case within the restricted confines of proviso to Section 12(1) of the J.J.Act, 2015. This is not disputed that the juvenile-revisionist has no criminal history and nothing adverse has been observed in his character and conduct in the social investigation report. The juvenile has been found merely 17 years of age on the date of incident and his studies have been disrupted because of his apprehension. In fact, it has been observed by the D.P.O that his neighbors had positive opinion about him.

¶20

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.

¶21

In view of the above, especially, in view of the period of incarceration already undergone, the revision is allowed. The judgment and order dated 22.11.2021 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Hathras and order dated 11.01.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), First Hathras, District Hatras are hereby set aside.

¶22

Let the revisionist, minor "X' through his natural guardian/father Man Singh s/o Prabhati, resident of Nagla Loka, P.S. Mahawan, District Mathura, be released on bail in case crime no.439 of 2021, under Section 8/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Sadabad, District Hathras upon his father Man Singh furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of his relatives, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Hathras subject to the following conditions:

¶23

(i) that the natural guardian/father Man Singh 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 mother will ensure that the juvenile will not indulge in any criminal activity;

¶24

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

¶25

(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

¶26

evidence when the witnesses are present in court;

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

Order Date :- 5.12.2022

¶30

Asha

¶31

Digitally signed by ASHA Date: 2022.12.06 17:00:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

X Minor v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X Minor 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

Mukhtar Ahmed Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others

Sajo and Another Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Devi and 9 Others Vs State of U P and 4 Others

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

Anshu @ Mohd Riyaz Vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile X (Minor) Vs State of U.P.