Allowed

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

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2023CRLR/1870/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision, the High Court held that the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court erred by not properly considering Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act and the Probation Officer report. The court set aside the orders granting disposition and granted bail to the juvenile minor.

What did the court decide?

Orders of Juvenile Justice Board and Appellate Court set aside; petitioner released on bail with conditions regarding association, education, and reporting.

X- Minor Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:130842

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1870 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- X- Minor Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Deleep Kumar Chaudhari,Akhlendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for revisionist, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the 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 judgment and order dated 03.03.2023 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Chitrakoot in Criminal Appeal No. 02 of 2023 as well as order dated 01.02.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Chitrakoot. Further prayed to stay the operation of the aforesaid orders and to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 531 of 2020, under Sections 305, 341, 376D IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Chitrakoot.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that the revisionist was not named in the F.I.R. but during investigation his name was brought into light on the basis of statement made by the mother of the victim. As per allegation in the F.I.R. three persons took away the victim from her house and committed rape with her. The victim expressed inability in identifying the culprits as a result on the basis of information, F.I.R. was lodged against co-accused Kinsh and his companion on 13.10.2020 whereas the incident was said to be committed on 08.10.2020 and victim has committed suicide on 13.10.2020. Further submitted that whole incident was narrated by the victim to the informant, mother of the victim on the basis of which present F.I.R. was lodged but no name of the present delinquent was mentioned in the F.I.R. when her statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C she implicated the present revisionist also. It is also submitted that the victim committed suicide subsequent to the commission of rape on account of

¶9

grievance with the incident committed with her. She committed suicide by hanging as per postmortem report. The age of the delinquent was 17 years 11 months 9 days. The statement of the victim was also recorded by the police but she never disclosed the name of present delinquent for committing rape with her. Coaccused Satish Kacher has already been granted bail by coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Revision No. 1988 of 2021 vide order dated 4.11.2022. Co-accused Kinsh was entangled with the victim and a SIM Card was also provided to her through which both of them made conversation. In this way, there is nothing on record to show the complicity of present delinquent. There is nothing adverse to the present delinquent in the report as submitted by the District Probation Officer. The provisions as contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as appellate court. The delinquent is in Juvenile Care Home since 15.10.2020 and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside the order passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the aforesaid prayer and urged that in this case, the delinquent was about to become major and parity from the co-accused delinquent cannot be claimed.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the provisions as contained u/s 12 Juvenile Justice Act and report submitted by the D.P.O. it appears that J.J. Board as well as the appellate court had not considered the relevant provisions and the material on record in well manner but passed the order 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 01.02.2023 and the appellate court dated 03.03.2023 are, hereby, set aside and present Criminal Revision is hereby, allowed .

¶13

It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail on executing personal 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 revisionist/father will furnish an undertaking that upon

¶15

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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

Order Date :- 4.7.2023 A. Singh

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Musheer Ahmad and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

X Minor Vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile X Vs State of U.P. and Another

X Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nawab Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others