Allowed

Umakant Pasi @ Chainu v. State of U.P and Anr.

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023/73/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal revision against the bail rejection order in a POCSO case involving a juvenile revisionist. The impugned judgment and order were set aside, and the revisionist was directed to be released on bail with specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; revisionist released on bail with bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties; brother to ensure education and supervision.

Umakant Pasi @ Chainu Vs State of U.P and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 27 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 73 of 2022 Revisionist :- Umakant Pasi @ Chainu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Anr. Counsel for Revisionist :- Amit Kumar Gupta,Girish Kumar Pandey,Kamlesh Kumar Gupta,Praveen Kumar Srivastav,Sher Bahadur Yadav

¶2

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶4

Counter affidavit filed today by the State is taken on record.

¶5

Vide order dated 07.02.2022, notice was issued to the opposite party no. 2 and as per the office report, the same has been served upon opposite party no. 2.

¶6

Case called out. None is present on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

¶7

In the aforesaid circumstances, the Court is proceeding in the matter.

¶8

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

¶9

The instant application has been filed with a prayer to allow the revision and set-aside the impugned judgement and order dated 21.12.2021 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Newly Court POCSO Act and rape case room no. 15, District Sitapur in Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2021 as well as the Juvenile Justice Board, Sitapur in Case Crime No. 262 of 2021 under Sections 376, 342, 506 of the IPC, Police Station Emaliya Sultanpur, District Sitapur.

¶10

The learned counsel appearing for the revisionist submits that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated due to ulterior motive. He next added that the FIR is delayed by two days and there is no plausible explanation given thereof. He next added that the version of the FIR contradicts the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 161 CrPC and thus the same demolishes the story of the prosecution. He submits that an improbable story has been narrated in the statement of the victim under Section 161 CrPC that when the prosecutrix was going with her parents, the present revisionist had taken away the victim, forcibly but no such information was given by the parents of the prosecutrix on that said date before the Police Station. He next added that the DPO report also favours the contention of the revisionist. In case the revisionist is enlarged

¶11

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.

¶12

It is further submitted that the Juvenile Justice Board and also the appellate court while rejecting the bail application overlooked the opinion of the district Probation Officer as also the 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; rather contrary to it, the District Probation Officer has opined in favour of the juvenile and no adverse material is available against the revisionist. It is next submitted on behalf of the revisionist that bail to a child in reference to Section 12 of the Act in conflict with law is a rule and denial is an exception.

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

Resultantly, the criminal revision is hereby allowed .

¶16

The impugned Judgment and order dated 21.12.2021 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Newly Court POCSO Act and rape case room no. 15, District Sitapur in Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 2021 as well as the Juvenile Justice Board, Sitapur in Case Crime No. 262 of 2021 under Sections 376, 342, 506 of the IPC, Police Station Emaliya Sultanpur, District Sitapur are hereby set aside.

¶17

It is directed that the the revisionist be released on bail in aforementioned Case Crime No.262 of 2021 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 brother 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.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.2.2023/Anurag

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Umakant Pasi @ Chainu v. State of U.P and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umakant Pasi @ Chainu v. State of U.P and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arif Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. and Others

Parmeshwar and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Govt. of U.P., Lko. and Others

Jai Vijay Singh @ Vikas Singh, Thru. His Father Sri Dharmendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Mohammad Kamal and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja Yadav @ Virendra Kumar Thru. His Father Radhey Shyam Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others