Disposed

X Son of Y v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2024CRLR/597/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a criminal revision by an offender challenging his conviction and sentence under POCSO and IPC provisions. The revisionist admitted serving the sentence and urged release. Finding no illegality in the impugned orders, the Court dismissed the petition but directed immediate release from the reformatory home if the term is completed.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision is disposed of. The revisionist is directed to be released from the reformatory home forthwith, provided the sentence term is completed and no other substantive detention is pend

X Son of Y Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:77022

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 597 of 2024

¶4

Revisionist :- X Son Of Y

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Uma Shanker,Smriti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhilesh Singh Chauhan

¶6

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The instant criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist against the judgment and order dated 01.05.2024 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No.11, Unnao in Criminal Appeal No.56 of 2023 "X vs. State of U.P. and others" and judgment and order dated 01.09.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Unnao in Criminal Case No.57 of 2015 "State vs. X".

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that vide order dated 01.09.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Unnao, the revisionist/ juvenile has been convicted and sentenced to undergo for a period of one year imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence under Sections 354Kha I.P.C. and Sections 9/10 POCSO Act and in default of payment of fine, he has further been directed to undergo in the reformatory home for a period of one month. He has also been convicted and sentenced to undergo for a period of six months for the offence under Section 504 I.P.C. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. His further submission is that the aforesaid sentence was affirmed vide order dated 01.05.2024 passed by the learned appellate court in Criminal Appeal No.56 of 2023.

¶10

His further submission is that during pendency of the present revision, the period for which the revisionist/ juvenile in conflict with the law was to be kept in the reformatory home has already lapsed, therefore, he may be released from the reformatory home. He has very fairly stated that he does not wish to press this revision on its merits.

¶11

Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, submits that the revisionist/ juvenile in conflict with the law was rightly held guilty of the

¶12

offence under Sections 354Kha, 504 I.P.C. and Sections 9/10 POCSO Act and was awarded appropriate punishment therefor in accordance with Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

¶13

His further submission is that learned appellate court also, after appreciating rival arguments, has affirmed the judgment and order dated 01.09.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Unnao, therefore, no interference with the same is warranted by this Court.

¶14

Having heard learned counsel for revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the record, this Court does not find any illegality or irregularity with the impugned orders dated 01.05.2024 and 01.09.2023, as no such illegality or irregularity could be pointed out or demonstrated by the learned counsel for the revisionist, who has confined his argument to the only fact that the revisionist/ juvenile has already served out the sentence awarded to him in accordance with law.

¶15

It is no more res integra that the concurrent finding of fact recorded by the learned trial Courts cannot be upset unless there is overwhelming evidence contrary to it. Therefore, the instant criminal revision lacks merit.

¶16

However, it is needless to mention that in case, the revisionist/ juvenile has already undergone the sentence awarded by the learned trial Court vide judgment and order dated 01.09.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Unnao, he shall be released from the reformatory home forthwith, if he is not detained or required to be detained in any other matter.

¶17

In the aforesaid view of the matter, the instant criminal revision is finally disposed of.

¶18

Order Date :- 21.11.2024 Mahesh

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MAHESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

X Son of Y v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X Son of Y v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Imran Afreen Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Vinod Kumar Shukla @ Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mayank Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Suhel Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 5 Others

Dinesh Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Gautam Kumar Agarwal Vs Smt. Varsha Agarwal and Another