Allowed

X v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Jul 2023CRLR/1276/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a criminal revision filed by the father of an accused juvenile, setting aside orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board and the appellate court for not considering material and relevant provisions under the JJ Act, and directed the release of the juvenile on bail.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; juvenile released on bail by executing personal bond and furnishing sureties on conditions of no contact with criminals, pursuance of education, and reporting to Probation O

X Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:145851

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1276 of 2022

¶4

Revisionist :- X Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Sukhvir Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

List revised. None appeared on behalf of the opposite party even in the revised call. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act-2015 (hereinafter referred to as "J.J. Act, 2015) to allow the present revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 25.01.2022 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Etah in Criminal Appeal No.55 of 2021 (Satyam vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & another) as well as order dated 04.12.2021 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Etah in Bail Application No.65 of 2021 (Satyam vs. State of U.P.) under Sections 376 AB I.P.C. & Section 5(M)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Rijor, District Etah arising out of Case Crime No.32 of 2021 and also prays to release the revisionist/delinquent on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶8

It is submitted that in this case the delinquent/applicant was aged about 14 years, 2 months at the time of alleged incident. As per allegation in F.I.R. the delinquent is said to have committed rape with the victim on 03.03.2021 regarding which an F.I.R. was lodged on 04.03.2021. Further submitted that the story of rape was concocted with ulterior motive. The victim was 12 years of age at the time of alleged incident and she was medically examined promptly just after the F.I.R. but no any injury was found either on her person or on her private part including genital area which infers that no rape was committed with her by the present delinquent. There is no any other material on record to show the complicity of the preset delinquent in committing the offence of rape with the victim. The report submitted by the D.P.O. is also not adverse for the present delinquent even though the juvenility of the delinquent was not considered either by the J.J. Board or by the appellate court and also the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the aforesaid Act were not considered by the courts below while passing the aforesaid orders. The delinquent is in Juvenile Care Home since 05.03.2021 (i.e. more than 2 years) and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside the orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the present

¶9

criminal revision as the orders passed by the courts below cannot be said to be in conformity with law.

¶10

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., perusal of record, the provisions as contained u/s 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, the report submitted by the District Probation Officer and the confessional statement of other co-accused persons and the role of the present delinquent, 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 04.12.2021 and the appellate court dated 25.01.2022 are, hereby, set aside and the present criminal revision is hereby, allowed.

¶13

It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on executing person bond by the revisionist (father 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 natural guardian/father 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 father will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

¶15

(ii) The natural guardian/father 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 natural guardian/father 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 :- 21.7.2023 Ashok Gupta

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

X v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Juvenile X Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Pintoo Alias Subhash Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vyas Kumar Sharma Minor Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shammi Chauhan Vs the State of U.P. and 3 Others

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