Allowed

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

Allahabad HC1 Nov 2023CRLR/1613/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court for not applying judicial mind to Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The revision was allowed, orders set aside, and the minor was released on bail with strict supervision conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders of JJ Board and appellate court set aside; revision allowed; minor released on bail with conditions.

X (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:209358

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1613 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- X (Minor) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Amzad Rza,Vijay Prakash Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amar Jeet

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the opposite party is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 02.02.2023 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Siddharth Nagar in Criminal Appeal No. 06 of 2023 as well as order dated 20.12.2022 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Siddharth Nagar. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 131 of 2022 under Section 376, (Ka) (Kha), 452 I.P.C. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Chilhiya, District Siddharth Nagar.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 14 at the time of alleged incident. It is further submitted that in this case F.I.R. was lodged under Section 354 (Ka) I.P.C. and 7/8 of POCSO Act after delay of two days without any explanation. It was also submitted that no allegation of rape was made in the F.I.R. but during investigation the allegation of rape was also made against the revisionist under the pressure of inmates of the victim. During medical examination no any injury was found on the person of the victim to suggest that rape was committed with her. There is no any other evidence on record to show that the revisionist committed such offence with her except the statement made by the victim herself. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.

¶10

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 03.10.2022 i.e. about one year and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal

¶11

revision.

¶12

Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. In this regard, the orders passed by the learned J.J. Board as well as learned appellate court cannot be said to be unlawful, therefore, he cannot be said to be entitled for bail and revision, being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, 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.

¶14

Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 20.12.2022 and the appellate court dated 02.02.2023 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed .

¶15

It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail 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 :-

¶16

(i) The revisionist/ 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.

¶17

(ii) The revisionist/ 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.

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

Order Date :- 1.11.2023 Suraj Srivastav

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X (Minor) 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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

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

Mr. X Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Mursalin Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rafikunnisha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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