Allowed

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

Allahabad HC13 Dec 2023CRLR/3829/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This revision set aside an order by the Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court which failed to consider Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act. The High Court allowed the revision and directed the release of the juvenile on bail subject to strict conditions including supervision and reporting to a Probation Officer.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the orders of the Juvenile Justice Board dated 11.4.2023 and appellate court dated 31.5.2023. Released the delinquent on bail on executing personal bond with two sureties under specific cond

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:235695

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3829 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- Juvenile 'X' Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Mukesh Dhar Dwivedi,Manish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mayank Mani,Pusp Raj Singh,Rajesh Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for revisionist, 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 revisionist through his mother 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 31.5.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 1, Deoria in Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 2023 as well as order dated 11.4.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Deoria. Further prayed to stay the operation of the aforesaid orders and to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 825 of 2022, under Sections 376, 506 IPC & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Deoria.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the delinquent was juvenile aged about 16 years, 16 days at the time of alleged offence. The victim was also aged about 16 years and in relation with the revisionist and there was conversation between both of them when this matter came into the knowledge of the parents of the victim, present F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. During medical examination, no any fresh injury was found on the person of victim to suggest that rape was committed by him with the victim. There is allegation of preparing video and threat to make it viral but there is nothing on record to show that video was prepared. 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 26.2.2023 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.

¶9

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as A.G.A. opposed the aforesaid prayer.

¶10

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.

¶11

Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 11.4.2023 and the appellate court dated 31.5.2023 are, hereby, set aside and present Criminal Revision is hereby, allowed .

¶12

It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail on executing personal bond by the revisionist (mother of the delinquent) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The revisionist/mother 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 mother will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

¶14

(ii) The revisionist/mother 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.

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.12.2023 A. Singh

¶18

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juvenile 'X' 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

Harbansh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mithlesh Kumar @ Guddu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohitash Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

X (Minor) Vs State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Raies Usmani Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manyak Tripathi vs State of U.P. and 5 Others