Allowed

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

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2024CRLR/2141/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed the criminal revision filed by a juvenile against orders of the Special Judge and Juvenile Justice Board. The court found that the FIR arose from a false promise to marry as the victim was later found major, deleting relevant sections, and released the juvenile on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Set-aside impugned judgment and order dated 2.4.2024 and order dated 20.1.2024; Release juvenile on bail with conditions including education and reporting to District Probation Officer.

X- Juvenile vs State of U.P. and Another — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:147733

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2141 of 2024 Revisionist :- X- Juvenile Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Manju Lata Verma,Ram Sumer Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dinesh Kumar Pandey,G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

1. List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Ram Sumer Chaudhary, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Dinesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present revision under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been preferred by the revisionist-X Juvenile against the order dated 2.4.2024 passed by Special Judge Exclusive Court (POCSO Act), Maharajganj in Criminal Appeal No. 08/2024 as well as order dated 20.1.2024 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Maharajganj in Bail Application No.6 of 2024 in Check No. 04 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No.295 of 2023, u/s 366, 376, 506 IPC, P.S. Kothi Bahar, District Maharajganj.

¶8

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 10.8.2023 by the mother of the victim against the revisionist alleging therein that on 2.8.2023 the revisionist has lured her minor daughter aged about 14 years and committed rape upon her and made an objectionable video of her and also on threat of making the said video viral, he is committing rape regularly on her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the revisionist argued that the revisionist has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the FIR of the matter was lodged under Section 363, 376, 506 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act but during investigation since the victim was found major, Sections 363 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act were deleted from the said sections. It is argued that the victim has given her statement during investigation and has stated that the relationship between them was on a promise to marry but the revisionist subsequently refused to marry her. The discussion of marriage between the revisionist and the victim could not materialize and as such present FIR has been lodged. It is argued that the revisionist has no criminal history, para 16 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court. The revisionist is in jail since 18.8.2023. Hence present revision deserves to be allowed.

¶10

Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and

¶11

learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and arguments and argued that the present case is a case of false promise to marry on which the revisionist established physical relationship with the victim. The present revision be thus rejected.

¶12

After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that Sections 363 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act have been deleted during investigation since the victim was found to be major. The case is of a false promise to marry and some discussions between the parties. The said marriage could not materialize due to which FIR has been lodged.

¶13

The present revision is allowed . The impugned judgement and order dated 2.4.2024 passed by Special Judge Exclusive Court (POCSO Act), Maharajganj and the impugned judgement and order dated 20.1.2024 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Maharajganj in the aforesaid case are hereby set aside. The bail application of the revisionist is allowed .

¶14

Let the revisionist (X juvenile) through his natural guardian/father Shambhu Gupta be released on bail in aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶15

(i) that the natural guardian/father will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the juvenile will not be permitted to come into contact or association with any known criminal or be exposed to any moral, physical or psychological danger and further that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

¶16

(ii) that the guardian/father will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will be placed in a school and encouraged to his studies and not allow to waste his time in unproductive and mere recreational pursuits.

¶17

(iii) The revisionist and his father will report to the District Probation Officer on the first Monday of every month with effect from the first Monday of the month next after release from custody, and, if during any calendar month the first Monday falls on a holiday then on the following working day.

¶18

(iv) The District Probation Officer will keep strict vigil on the activities of the revisionist and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on such periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board determines.

¶19

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 10.9.2024/Gaurav Kuls

¶21

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X- Juvenile 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

Mahendra and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Akshipt Gupta and 2 Others vs State of Up Others

Sarfaraj Ahmad and Others vs State of Up ANOther

Juvenile X vs State of U.P. and Another

Akash Sagar and 7 Others vs State of Up and Another

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