Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad considered a revision under the JJ Act challenging the release of a 16-year-old juvenile on bail. The court found reviewing the probation report and evidence that the appellate order was lawful and devoid of illegality, dismissing the revision.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155250
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2394 of 2023
Revisionist :- Gauri Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Rohit Nandan Shukla,Ramesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Garun Pal Singh
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned counsel for the opposite party alongwith A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist 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 17.03.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mathura in Criminal Juvenile Appeal No.24 of 2023 (State vs. Child Delinquent (R)) otherwise the revisionist will suffer irreparable loss and injury.
It is submitted that in this case the delinquent was aged about 16 years, 4 months at the time of alleged incident and his bail application was rejected by the learned J.J. Board on considering the gravity of the offence but the learned appellate court enlarged him on bail in appeal without considering the gravity and nature of the act of the delinquent. Further submitted that the revisionist was attending tuition classes at coaching run by co-accused Abhishek Saxena who established physical relations with her by administering some intoxicant and prepared a video. Thereafter, by using the said video he continued to establish physical relations with her and then it was transferred in the mobile phone of the delinquent who also misused the video and established physical relations with informant/revisionist by doing the threat of making the video viral that was the reason she was under compulsion to let him establish physical relation with her. In the meantime, coaccused Abhishek Saxena compelled the informant to take her younger sister and also exploited her sexually. Later on, the present delinquent/opposite party also exploited her sexually. This fact was not taken into consideration by the learned appellate court but enlarged him on bail which cannot be said to be lawful and based on the material on record. Even the report filed by the District Probation Officer was also not considered by the learned appellate court in well manner. Even in the statement of the victim as recorded by learned Magistrate u/s 164 Cr.P.C. she supported the allegations as aforesaid and also stated that video was prepared by the opposite party/delinquent. Therefore, requested to set aside the order passed in appeal by the learned appellate court.
Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case informant/revisionist was major at the time of alleged incident and she was consensus with co-accused Abhishek Saxena and established physical relations with him. Since the opposite party/delinquent was also a student in the coaching of co-accused Abhishek Saxena that was the reason he was also implicated in this case by the informant but no any allegation was made in the F.I.R. that he committed rape with younger sister of the informant except the allegation that opposite party/delinquent also established physical relations with the informant by using the video which was transferred in his mobile phone by co-accused Abhishek Saxena. In this way, the main role was assigned to co-accused Abhishek Saxena and not to the present delinquent/opposite party. It is also contended that the statement of younger sister of revisionist u/s 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the learned Magistrate in which she did not state that rape was committed by the present delinquent with her except the statement regarding making of video. In this way allegation of rape said to be committed with the informant/revisionist and also with her younger sister was against the co-accused Abhishek Saxena. Further contended that learned appellate court considered the provisions as contained u/s 12 of J.J. Act and also the report filed by the District Probation Officer in which there was no any apprehension expressed by the him that after release the delinquent will come in association with known criminals. After considering the material on record and the relevant provisions as contained in the Act the appeal was allowed in which there is no any illegality or impropriety but the present revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the parties, the orders passed by learned J.J. Board as well as the appellate court, the report submitted by District Probation Officer and the provisions relating to release of child as contained u/s 12 of J.J. Act, there appears no any illegality or impropriety in the orders passed by the learned appellate court dated 17.03.2023 but this criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the present criminal revision is dismissed.
Order Date :- 3.8.2023 Ashok Gupta
Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellate order granting bail to the juvenile delinquent despite gravity of offence suffered any illegality or impropriety.
Whether facts regarding video misuse and coercion by co-accused were overlooked by appellate court in releasing the juvenile on bail.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Gauri Upadhyay
State Of U.P.
Child Delinquent
Abhishek Saxena
Subhash Chandra Sharma
Ashok Kumar Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
