Allowed

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

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2023CRLR/278/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal revision filed by a minor to set aside orders from the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court for failing to apply s. 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The High Court set aside those orders, granting bail to the minor subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders of JJB and appellate court set aside; revisionist released on bail via father executing bond with two sureties subject to four conditions including supervision and reporting.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:190617

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 278 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- X Minor Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Arvind Kumar Yadav,Arvind Kumar Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

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 25.11.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Etawah in Criminal Appeal No. 62 of 2022 as well as order dated 09.09.2022 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Etawah. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 97 of 2022 under Sections 376 AB I.P.C. and Section 5m/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Usarhar, District Etawah.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 16 years at the time of alleged incident. It is further submitted that as per allegation in F.I.R. rape is said to be committed with the victim who was of tender age but during medical examination no any external or internal injury was found on the private part of the victim. It suggests that no any such rape was committed by the present revisionist with the victim but on account of village rivalry he was named in F.I.R. with false allegations. It is also submitted that incident is said to have taken place on 04.05.2022 and F.I.R. was lodged on 07.05.2022 after delay of three days without any reasonable explanation. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.

¶9

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. He is in Child Care Home since 09.05.2022 i.e. more than one year and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision.

¶10

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

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, 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.

¶12

Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 09.09.2022 and the appellate court dated 25.11.2022 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed .

¶13

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 :-

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

Order Date :- 4.10.2023 Suraj Srivastav

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA 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 (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

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

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

Mr. X (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mr. X (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another