Allowed

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

Allahabad HC3 Oct 2023CRLR/1078/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal revision against orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court. The Court set aside the impugned orders for not applying judicial mind to Section 12 of the JJA before condemning a minor accused who had remained in custody for years.

What did the court decide?

Orders of JJB and appellate court set aside; minor released on bail with conditions to submit to probation officer and pursue studies.

X (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189103

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1078 of 2021

¶4

Revisionist :- X (Minor) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ronak Chaturvedi,Deepak Kumar Tripathi,Prateek Srivastava,Rajiv Kumar Singh,Vikrant Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his real brother with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 03.03.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sant Kabir Nagar in Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 2021 as well as order dated 09.02.2021 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Sant Kabir Nagar. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 697 of 2019 under Section 302/34 I.P.C., Police Station Khaleelabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 16 years at the time of alleged incident. It is further submitted that inquiry/ trial is going on but till now only statement of PW-1 has been recorded before the learned court. The conclusion of trial is also not possible in near future. It is also submitted that no any specific role was assigned to the present revisionist as per allegation in F.I.R. but during investigation after making improvement in the statements of witness main role was assigned to present revisionist. Other coaccused persons Shailendra Singh and Akash Singh @ Divanshu Singh were major have already been granted regular bail by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in bail application No 10034 of 2020 vide order dated 09.06.2020 and in bail application No. 4653 of 2020 vide order dated 04.02.2020 respectively. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.

¶9

It is further submitted that the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile Justice Board even the report submitted by Probation Officer was also not considered. The appellate court has also not considered all these facts but rejected the appeal without applying its judicial mind and considering the law as contained u/s 12 of the aforesaid Act. He is in Child Care Home since 25.09.2019 i.e. more than four years and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside orders

¶10

passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, the period delinquent remained in Child Care Home and none possibility of conclusion of trial in near future in view of status of trial, perusal of record, the provisions as contained u/s 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, the report submitted by the Probation Officer, it appears that Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court had not considered the relevant provisions and the material on record in well manner but passed the orders without applying their judicial mind. In this way, there appears ground in this revision and the orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as learned appellate court are liable to be set aside.

¶12

Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 09.02.2021 and the appellate court dated 03.03.2021 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed .

¶13

It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail on executing person bond by the revisionist ( real brother of the delinquent) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on following conditions :-

¶14

(i) The revisionist/ real brother will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionist will not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical, or psychological danger and further that the real brother will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

¶15

(ii) The revisionist/ real brother will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level which he would be encouraged to do besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits.

¶16

(iii) Juvenile and the revisionist/ real brother will report to the Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month.

¶17

(iv) The Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on such a periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.

¶18

Order Date :- 3.10.2023 Suraj Srivastav

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA 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

X- Juvenile Vs State of U.P. and Another

Xx (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile''B'' Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

X (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

X- Minor Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others