Allowed

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

Allahabad HC13 Dec 2023CRLR/75/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court quashed orders of Juvenile Justice Board and appellate court for not applying judicial mind under Section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, allowing criminal revision and directing bail.

What did the court decide?

Orders of JJ Board (29.10.2022) and appellate court (16.12.2022) set aside; revision allowed; delinquent released on bail with bonds and undertakings.

X (Minor) Vs State of U.P through Secretary… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:236593

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 75 of 2023

¶4

Revisionist :- X (Minor)

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Through Secretary Home And 3 Others

¶6

Counsel for Revisionist :- Rajiv Sisodia,Mohd. Naushad,Nadeem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Deependra Singh

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party 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 16.12.2022 passed by learned Juvenile Court/Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 1, Ghaziabad in Criminal Appeal No. 177 of 2022 as well as order dated 29.10.2022 passed by learned In-charge Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 1140 of 2022 under Section 363, 376 I.P.C. and Section 5L/6 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Indrapuram, District Ghaziabad.

¶10

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 17 years and 5 months at the time of alleged incident. As per allegations in the FIR, the victim aged about 16 was enticed away by the revisionist. The statement of the victim recorded by learned Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she accepted that she was taken by the revisionist to Rishikesh and then to Manali where physical relations were established between them. Thereafter, the victim was caught by Himachal Pradesh Police. It shows that she went with the revisionist voluntarily and willingly. There is no any force or violence has been used by the revisionist on her either her taking away or establishing physical relations. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.

¶11

It is further submitted that the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile

¶12

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 05.09.2022 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 as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid. In this regard, the orders passed by the learned Juvenile Court/Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act) as well as learned In-charge Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board cannot be said to be unlawful, therefore, he cannot be said to be entitled for bail and revision, being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.

¶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, the time delinquent remained in Child Care Home, 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 29.10.2022 and the appellate court dated 16.12.2022 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

¶19

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.

¶20

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

¶21

(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.

¶22

Order Date :- 13.12.2023 Anjali

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X (Minor) v. State of U.P through Secretary Home 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

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

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

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