Allowed

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

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2023CRLR/3340/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a criminal revision filed by juveniles to set aside orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court. The court held that the lower authorities failed to consider Section 12 of the JJ Act and the D.P.O. report. The revision is allowed, and the juveniles are directed to be released on bail with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders by Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court set aside. Revision allowed. Juveniles released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:179167

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3340 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- X- Juvenile And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ram Sagar Ram,Ajay Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionists through their natural guardians 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 4.4.2023 passed by learned Juvenile Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Chandauli in Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2022 as well as order dated 17.2.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Chandauli. Further prayed to stay the operation of the aforesaid orders and to release the revisionists on bail in Case Crime No. 183 of 2022, under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC, Police Station Chakiya, District Chandauli.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionists that in this case, the delinquents were juveniles at the time of alleged offence. The revisionist no. 1 is aged about 17 years & 4 months and revisionist no. 2 is aged about 16 years, 5 months & 22 days at the timed of alleged incident. Further submitted that co-accused Pooja was sister of the revisionists and wedded to Sunil who was murdered by co-accused Munna with whom she was entangled. The recovery was also shown at the instance of co-accused Munna but the present delinquents were also named in the F.I.R. by the inmates of the deceased with all members of their family. Further submitted that they may have no any enmity to commit murder of their brother-in-law but it was with co-accused with whom the sister of the delinquents was entangled. There is nothing on record to show the complicity of present delinquents. No any recovery either from the possession or at their instance. Co-accused Ramkeval, Manoja Devi and Pooja who were major have been enlarged on regular bail by coordinate Bench of this Court. There

¶9

is nothing adverse to the present delinquents 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 delinquents are in Juvenile Care Home since 21.10.2022 and their 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 counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as A.G.A. opposed the aforesaid prayer and urged that the bail application of co-accused Munna has already been rejected by coordinate Bench of this Court and the involvement of present delinquents can also not been denied, therefore, there is no ground to release them on bail.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionists 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 17.2.2023 and the appellate court dated 4.4.2023 are, hereby, set aside and present Criminal Revision is hereby, allowed .

¶13

It is directed that delinquents/applicants be released on bail on executing personal bond by the revisionists (natural guardians of the delinquents) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The revisionists/natural guardians will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionists 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 natural guardians will ensure that the juveniles will not repeat the offence.

¶15

(ii) The revisionists/natural guardians will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue their study at the appropriate level which they would be encouraged to do besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste their time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits.

¶16

(iii) Juvenile and the revisionist/natural guardians 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 juveniles and regularly draw up their 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 :- 18.9.2023 A. Singh

¶19

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X- Juvenile and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravindra Sharma @ Pintu Pandit Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Kishore Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

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

Salman Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another