Allowed

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

Allahabad HC4 Oct 2023CRLR/2869/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal revision challenging orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board and Sessions Court. The court set aside prior decisions for lack of application of mind to Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act and directed bail with strict supervision conditions.

What did the court decide?

Orders of Juvenile Justice Board dated 23.01.2023 and appellate court dated 05.04.2023 set aside. Delinquent released on bail with conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:190458

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2869 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- Mr. X (Minor) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Subhash Chandra Tiwari,Shakti Shanker Tiwari

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Buddhi Prakash

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶7

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶9

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 05.04.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 2023 as well as order dated 23.01.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Allahabad. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 276 of 2022 under Section 302, 34 I.P.C., Police Station Audyogik Kshetra, District Allahabad.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 13 years 11 months at the time of alleged incident which took place on 20.09.2022/ 21.09.2022 in the night. It is further submitted that father of the deceased informed the police on 21.09.2022 at 11:09 am that the deceased has died due to unknown reasons. He took him for treatment to the doctor who declared him dead. This information was entered into G.D. No. 64 of 21.09.2022. Later on, on the same day at 10:30 p.m. F.I.R. was lodged naming the revisionist and other co-accused including real sister of the deceased. It is further submitted that in the post mortem report five injuries were found on the person of the deceased and cause of death was mentioned as strangulation but there is no any material on record to show that present

¶11

revisionist committed murder of the deceased with other coaccused persons. No any kind of recovery was made either from the possession or at the instance of the present revisionist. It is also submitted that only on the basis of confessional statement made by co-accused Sapna (real sister of the deceased) the revisionist and other co-accused persons were named in F.I.R. In this way, the whole prosecution story was concocted by the informant subsequently and revisionist was also named in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.

¶12

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 22.09.2022 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.

¶13

Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the revisionist was in affair with co-accused Sapna who was real sister of the deceased and in connivance with her murder of the deceased was committed by all of them by causing injuries on the person of the deceased and strangulation. It is also contended that the statement of the mother of deceased was recorded by I.O. in which it has been disclosed that query was made with the co-accused Sapna who disclosed that present revisionist with other co-accused along with Sapna committed murder of the deceased. In this way, he cannot be said to be entitled for bail and in case he is released on bail he will come in association with hardened criminals.

¶14

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

¶15

Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 23.01.2023 and the appellate court dated 05.04.2023 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed .

¶16

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 :-

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

Order Date :- 4.10.2023 Suraj Srivastav

¶22

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

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 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