Allowed

Juvenile v. Accused of Crime No 125/2022, Thru. His Natural Guardian v State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2024CRLR/21/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the criminal revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice Act, setting aside orders rejecting bail for a juvenile accused. The Court granted bail considering the victim's initial statement, the absence of a social inquiry report recommending detention, and the juvenile's lack of criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to juvenile revisionist in Crime No. 125/2022 subject to personal bond with two sureties and strict conditions regarding guardian supervision and reporting to Probation Officer.

Juvenile v Accused of Crime No 125/2022… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:15180

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 21 of 2024 Revisionist :- Juvenile V Accused Of Crime No 125/2022, Thru. His Natural Guardian

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Revisionist :- Dilip Kumar Pandey,Manoj Kumar Verma

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶8

Heard Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the revisionist and Ms. Charu Singh the learned A.G.A appearing on behalf of the State and perused the record.

¶9

The instant criminal revision has been filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2015, challenging the validity of order dated 21.09.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh rejecting the bail application of the revisionist and the judgment and order dated 04.12.2023 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act/Juvenile Court, Pratapgarh, dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 101/2023 filed by the revisionist against rejection of his bail application.

¶10

The opposite party no.2 had lodged an F.I.R No. 125/2022 on 10.06.2022 against three persons, including the revisionist, alleging that the revisionist had enticed away the informant's daughter aged about 16 years on 09.06.2022 and the other accused persons had assisted him in commission of the offence.

¶11

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, she stated that she was in a relationship with the revisionist for the past two years and she used to talk to him through mobile phone. Her family members had scolded her

¶12

for this reason and, therefore, she had gone away from her home. She categorically stated that no misdeed was committed against her. However, in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C, she changed her version and alleged commission of rape by the revisionist.

¶13

A copy of the Social Inquiry Report submitted by the District Probation Officer has been annexed with the revision, wherein no such recommendation has been made as would warrant continue detention of the revisionist.

¶14

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the initial statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, coupled with the fact that the revisionist is a juvenile having no criminal history, I am of the view that the juvenile revisionist is entitled to be released on bail and the revision deserves to be allowed.

¶15

Accordingly, the revision is allowed . The impugned order dated 21.09.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh rejecting the bail application of the revisionist and the judgment and order dated 04.12.2023 passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act/Juvenile Court, Pratapgarh, dismissing the Criminal Appeal No. 101/2023 are hereby set aside.

¶16

Let the revisionist- Juvenile V Accused Of Crime No 125/2022, Thru. His Natural Guardian be released on bail in Case Crime No. 125/2022, under Sections 363, 366A, 376, 342, 506 I.P.C and 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Ashpur Devsara, District Pratapgarh, upon his guardian furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of his relatives, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh, subject to the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) the natural guardian will furnish an undertaking that upon

¶18

release on bail the juvenile will not be permitted to come into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical or psychological danger and further that the guardian will ensure that the juvenile will not indulge in any criminal activity;

¶19

(ii) natural guardian 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.

¶20

(iii) juvenile accompanied by his natural guardian, will report to the Probation Officer on the first working day of every calendar month. The D.P.O. shall maintain a diary recording their attendance.

¶21

(iv) The District Probation Officer will keep 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, Pratapgarh.

¶22

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court/J.J.Board shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led, uninfluenced by any finding or observation whatsoever in this order.

¶23

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 20.2.2024 Preeti.

¶25

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Juvenile v. Accused of Crime No 125/2022, Thru. His Natural Guardian v State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juvenile v. Accused of Crime No 125/2022, Thru. His Natural Guardian v State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rakesh Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and 3 Others

Janki Prasad and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Mahangu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Another

Mohammad Wasiuddin Alias Waseem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Yogesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. Lko. and Another