Allowed

Prateek Mishra Thru. His Father Narendra Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Sultanpur and Another

Allahabad HC30 May 2023/404/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision, the court allowed the plea of the juvenile revisionist by and through his father to set aside earlier bail rejection orders. The court directed release on bail with conditions regarding education and conduct, subject to a surety bond.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment and orders on bail rejected by Additional Sessions Judge and Juvenile Justice Board set aside. Revisionist released on bail with specific conditions.

Prateek Mishra Thru. His Father Narendra Mishra Vs State… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 404 of 2023

¶3

Revisionist :- Prateek Mishra Thru. His Father Narendra Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Sultanpur And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Permeshwar Dutt Tewari,Kamlesh Kumari

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Instant criminal revision has been filed with the prayer to allow the criminal revision and set-aside the impugned Judgement and order dated 17.3.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Additional Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.3, Sultanpur in Criminal Appeal No.12 of 2023 (Prateek Mishra Vs. State of U.P. and another and the order dated 23.12.2022 passed by court of Juvenile Justice Board, Sultanpur in Case Crime No.176 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 302/34 I.P.C. P.S. Munshiganj, District Amethi.

¶8

Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant matter. He submits that due to enmity, the revisionist has been named in the present case though there is no piece of evidence against him so as to connect him with the instant matter. There is no likelihood of the revisionist in coming into association with any known criminal or exposing him to moral, physical or psychological danger in the event he is released on bail. There is no criminal history of the revisionist, which has been mentioned in the ground (w) of the revision. The revisionist has not committed any offence and he is suffering for his no fault. In case the revisionist is enlarged on bail, the guardian of the revisionist undertakes that the revisionist will not again involve himself in committing the offence and the revisionist will always observe good conduct and behaviour.

¶9

It is further submitted that the Juvenile Justice Board and also the appellate court while rejecting the bail application overlooked true spirit and intent of the Legislature as provided under Section 12 of the Act. It is submitted that in the present case, no such contingency as provided in Section 12 of the Act is present. It is next submitted on behalf of the revisionist that

¶10

bail to a child in reference to Section 12 of the Act in conflict with law is a rule and denial is an exception.Therefore, submission is that the order passed by the trial court may be set aside and he revisionist may be released from child protection home.

¶11

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the legal proposition and submits that the court may pass appropriate order in the best interest of the child.

¶12

There is no material on record to indicate that in case the revisionist is released, it would 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.

¶13

Resultantly, the criminal revision is hereby allowed.

¶14

The order dated 17.3.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Additional Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.3, Sultanpur in Criminal Appeal No.12 of 2023 (Prateek Mishra Vs. State of U.P. and another and the order dated 23.12.2022 passed by court of Juvenile Justice Board, Sultanpur in Case Crime No.176 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 302/34 I.P.C. P.S. Munshiganj, District Amethi, are hereby set aside.

¶15

It is directed that the the revisionist be released on bail in aforementioned Case Crime No.176 of 2022 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of concerned Juvenile Justice Board subject to the condition that the father of the revisionist will take care of his education and betterment and will not allow to indulge him in any criminal activity and will keep constant check on his activities. Both the sureties are directed to be close relatives of the revisionist juvenile.

¶16

Order Date :- 30.5.2023 Ram Murti

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Prateek Mishra Thru. His Father Narendra Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Sultanpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prateek Mishra Thru. His Father Narendra Mishra v. State of U.P. Thru. District Magistrate, Sultanpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kiran and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Sitaram Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Jaswant @ Shiva Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vineet Kumar Thru. His Father Raju Bhargav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Juvenile Mr. X Thru. His Mother Smt. Ram Lali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another