Allowed

X (Minor) v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2023CRLR/2595/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal revision filed by a minor revisionist. The Court held that the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court failed to apply their judicial mind and consider relevant provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 regarding the minor's release and care.

What did the court decide?

The minor revisionist was directed to be released on bail by executing a person bond with two sureties and complying with supervision conditions imposed by the Juvenile Justice Board.

X (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:173620

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2595 of 2022

¶4

Revisionist :- X (Minor) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Sumit Kumar Srivastava,Brijesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the revisionist today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

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 impugned judgment and order dated 08.04.2022 passed by Additional District and Session Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act-I), Gorakhpur in Criminal Appeal No.16/2022 (Ugrasen Nishad vs. State of U.P.) as well as order dated 24.12.2021 passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur arising out of Case Crime No.168/2021, under Sections 376, 506, 323 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Gulariha, District Gorakhpur and also prays to release the revisionist/delinquent on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶9

It is submitted that in this case the delinquent/applicant was aged about 15 years at the time of alleged incident. Further submitted that the revisionist himself was beaten by the family members of the victim regarding which he lodged an F.I.R. as Crime No.168/2021 on 06.04.2021 and in counter-blast the present F.I.R. was lodged on 08.04.2021 by the mother of the victim with false allegation of rape with the victim while making house trespass in the night. It is further submitted that there is nothing on record to show that rape was committed with her by the revisionist. It is also submitted that during medical examination no any injury was found on the person of the victim to suggest that rape was committed with her. 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 11.08.2021 (i.e. more than two 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

¶10

present criminal revision as the orders passed by the courts below cannot be said to be in conformity with law.

¶11

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

¶12

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 examination report 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.

¶13

Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 24.12.2021 and the appellate court dated 08.04.2022 are, hereby, set aside and the present criminal revision is hereby, allowed.

¶14

It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case 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 :-

¶15

(i) The natural guardian/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.

¶16

(ii) The natural guardian/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 natural guardian/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 :- 28.8.2023 Ashok Gupta

¶20

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

X (Minor) v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X (Minor) v. State of U.P. and 2 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

Wasim Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sanu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sanjiv Vs State of U P and 4 Others

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

Saurabh @ Kannu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogendra Vs State of U.P. and Another