Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

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

Home
Allahabad HC
2023
Xxxx (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 3 OthersXxxx (Minor) v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allowed

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

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2023CRLR/1971/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Revision No. 1971 of 2023, the Allahabad High Court set aside the orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and the Session Court. The court held that the lower authorities failed to apply their judicial mind to Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act and relevant material. The revision was allowed and bail granted.

What did the court decide?

Orders of Juvenile Justice Board dated 23.12.2022 and appellate court dated 24.01.2023 set aside; revision allowed; delinquent released on bail after executing personal bond and two sureties bond with

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Orders of Juvenile Justice Board dated 23.12.2022 and appellate court dated 24.01.2023 set aside; revision allowed; delinquent released on bail after executing personal bond and two sureties bond with

Issue for consideration

Whether the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court applied their judicial mind to provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act. +1 more

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

This criminal revision was allowed by the High Court, which set aside the order of the Juvenile Justice Board and the appellate court. The judgment found that the lower authorities had failed to consider the relevant provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act and the Probation Officer's report in a proper manner without applying their judicial mind. Consequently, bail was granted for the juvenile petitioner under specific conditions.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

A

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:137714

Court No. - 80

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1971 of 2023

Revisionist :- Xxxx (Minor) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Neeraj Srivastava,Pankaj Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashwani Kumar Sachan,Saurabh Sachan

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

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.

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 24.01.2023 passed by learned Session Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Appeal No. 06 of 2023 as well as order dated 23.12.2022 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Kanpur Nagar. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 570 of 2022 under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 34 I.P.C. Police Station Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 15 years 5 months and 19 days at the time of alleged incident and he is in Child Care Home since 25.07.2022. It is further submitted that as per version in F.I.R. he was not named though F.I.R. was lodged by father of the deceased against 6 named and 3 to 4 unknown persons. It is also submitted that in the F.I.R. it was mentioned by father of the deceased that co-accused Vikas, Rahul and Shailendra made fire with Tamancha on the deceased and others assaulted with bricks. During investigation the name of the present delinquent was brought into light in the statement of the informant mother and sister of the deceased. No any such role was assigned to the present delinquent regarding making fire on the deceased. Later on, development was made by I.O. and an independent witness was examined in whose statement the role of firing was also assigned to the present delinquent though in the F.I.R. the father himself mentioned that he saw the assailants while making assault in which aforesaid Vikas, Rahul and Shailendra made fire. In this way, the statements of father

and other eye-witness are self-contradictory. It is also submitted that the recovery of a Tamancha 315 bore has also been shown at the instance of the present delinquent by the police but no any forensic report was obtained to connect the arm with the injury found on the person of the deceased. It is further submitted that there is no any other material on record to connect the delinquent with commission of the offence. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.

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, therefore, requested to set aside orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision.

Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case F.I.R. was lodged by father of the deceased but he could not mention the name of the present delinquent in the F.I.R. because he was not in a fit condition on account of death of his son. Later on, the eye-witness identified the present delinquent who was making fire on the deceased with other coaccused. Even during investigation a Tamancha of 315 bore was also recovered at the instance of the present delinquent. It is also contended that the report filed by D.P.O. also states that in case the delinquent is released on bail he will be adversely affected physically and psychologically. Keeping in view all these facts the learned J.J. Board and the learned appellate court has rejected the bail which could not be said to be against the provisions of law.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for both the parties, 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.

Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 23.12.2022 and the appellate court dated 24.01.2023 are,

hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed .

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 :-

(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.

(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.

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

(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.

Order Date :- 12.7.2023 Suraj Srivastav

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

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court applied their judicial mind to provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
2.
Whether the High Court can set aside orders passed without proper consideration of relevant statutory provisions and material.

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Juvenile Justice Act12

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Xxxx
respondent
State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Coram

AI extract

Subhash Chandra Sharma

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Allahabad HC
Decided on: 12 Jul 2023 · July
Registered: 12 Apr 2023
Case no.: CRLR/1971/2023
CNR: UPHC010807542023
Topic: Bail and Remand
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
Disposal: Allowed/Partly Allowed on merits

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Subhash Chandra Sharma

Juvenile X Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others
11 Jul 2023
X (Juvenile) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others
11 Jul 2023
Juvenile R Vs State of Up through Principal Secretary Home Gov. of Up and 3 Others
11 Jul 2023
Manoj Yadav @ Sonu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.
12 Jul 2023
Juvenile -X Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others
12 Jul 2023
X Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others
12 Jul 2023

Cite this judgement

Xxxx (Minor) v. State of U.P. and 3 Others, CRLR/1971/2023 (ALL), decided on 12 July 2023.

The Allahabad High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Juvenile Justice Act12

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

Subhash Chandra Sharma

Parties & counsel