Allowed

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

Allahabad HC11 Aug 2023CRLR/3063/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Revision allowed the petition to set aside the orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court for failing to consider relevant provisions under Section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015 and the D.P.O. report. The court directed the release of the juvenile on bail with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned orders and allow the criminal revision. Direct release of the juvenile on bail with personal bond and conditions regarding supervision, education, and reporting.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:162743

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3063 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- X- Juvenile Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Ravindra Pratap Singh,Vishal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Heard learned counsel for revisionist, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the 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 judgment and order dated 19.5.2023 passed by learned Juvenile Court, Bijnor in Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2023 as well as order dated 22.3.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Bijnor. Further prayed to stay the operation of the aforesaid orders and to release the revisionist on bail in Case No. 13 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 52 of 2023, under Sections 376-D, 506 IPC & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Syohara, District Bijnor.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the delinquent was juvenile aged about 13 years and 23 days at the time of alleged offence. The incident is said to have taken place on 24.1.2023 but F.I.R. was lodged on 31.1.2023 after delay of 7 days without any explanation thereto. The medical examination of the victim was conducted on 1.2.2023 but no any injury internal or external was found on her person to suggest that rape was committed with her. Statement of the victim has also been recorded before the learned J.J. Board as P.W. 2 in which she has not supported the allegation of rape. It is also submitted that there is nothing on record to show the complicity of present delinquent. There is nothing adverse to the present delinquent in the report as submitted by the District Probation Officer. The provisions as contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as appellate court while rejecting the appeal which cannot be said to be in conformity with the law. The delinquent is in Juvenile Care Home since 1.2.2023 and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside the order passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision.

¶10

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

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the provisions as contained u/s 12 Juvenile Justice Act and report submitted by the D.P.O. it appears that J.J. 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 22.3.2023 and the appellate court dated 19.5.2023 are, hereby, set aside and present Criminal Revision is hereby, allowed .

¶13

It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail on executing personal 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 :- 11.8.2023 A. Singh

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X- Juvenile 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

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

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

X- Juvenile Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mukul Vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile -X Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Lakhan Vs State of U.P. and 10 Others