Allowed

X (Juvenile) v. State of U.P. and 3 Another

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2023CRLR/1671/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal revision challenging the order of the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court, holding that relevant statutory provisions and material were not considered. It set aside the impugned orders and directed the release of the juvenile on bail with strict supervision conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; juvenile released on bail via mother providing undertaking to avoid criminal contact and ensure studies, with monthly reporting to Probation Officer.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:149180

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1671 of 2022

¶4

Revisionist :- X (Juvenile) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ravi Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

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 mother 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 10.02.2022 passed by Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act) Budaun in Criminal Appeal No.04 of 2022 (Lokesh (Juvenile) vs. State of U.P. and another) as well as order dated 03.01.2022 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Budaun in Case No.42/2021 (State vs. Lokesh) arising out of Case Crime No.323/2021 under Section 376-D I.P.C. & Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Civil Line, District Budaun 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 was aged about 16 years, 10 months, 14 days at the time of alleged incident. As per allegation in F.I.R. the victim was aged about 14 years who was taken away by the present delinquent with other co-accused person at the house of Ritik and rape was committed by both the persons. Further submitted that during medical examination no any injury was found on the person of the victim to suggest the commission of rape with her. In this way, the story of rape cannot be said to have taken place. It is also submitted that co-accused Ritik was major and has already been granted regular bail by the court concerned and the role of the present applicant cannot be said to be different from the co-accused person. 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 31.08.2021 (i.e. about 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 criminal revision as the orders passed by the courts below cannot be said to be in conformity with law.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.

¶10

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, the medical report of the victim and the period present delinquent remained in child care home, 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.

¶11

Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 03.01.2022 and the appellate court dated 10.02.2022 are, hereby, set aside and the present criminal revision is hereby, allowed.

¶12

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

¶13

(i) The natural guardian/mother 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 mother will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

¶14

(ii) The natural guardian/mother 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.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

Order Date :- 26.7.2023 Ashok Gupta

¶18

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

X (Juvenile) v. State of U.P. and 3 Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X (Juvenile) v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Juvenile X Minor Vs State of U.P. Another

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

X Juvenile Vs State of U.P.

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