Allowed

Juvenile X (Minor) Thru. His Father v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2024CRLR/768/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a criminal revision filed by a juvenile revisionist challenging bail rejection orders. Relying on the District Probation Officer's report and the granting of bail to a co-accused in a similar case, the court set aside the lower court orders and directed the juvenile's release on bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The judgment set aside the lower court orders rejecting bail and directed the release of the juvenile on bail subject to furnishing a bond with sureties and compliance with specified conditions.

Juvenile X (Minor) Thru. His Father vs State of U.P… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:56292

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 768 of 2024

¶4

Revisionist :- Juvenile X (Minor) Thru. His Father Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another

¶5

Counsel for Revisionist :- Shyam Narayan,Manas Gaurav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the opposite party No.1.

¶8

Despite notice having been issued to the opposite party No.2 and it having served on her through her brother as per the office report dated 04.07.2024, nobody has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.2, consequently, the Court proceeds to hear and decide the matter.

¶9

By means of the instant revision filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, the revisionist has challenged the validity of the order dated 07.05.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Barabanki rejecting his application for release on bail and the order dated 06.06.2024 passed by the Juvenile court, Court Room No.44, Barabanki dismissing Criminal Appeal No.26 of 2024 filed by the revisionist against the order rejecting his bail application.

¶10

The contention of learned counsel for the revisionist is that an F.I.R. had been lodged against the revisionist as well as Shri Harinaam Yadav on 13.11.2023 under the provision of Sections 323, 324, 354(Ka), 34, 504 of I.P.C. and Sections 3(2)(Va), 3(1) (Da), 3(1)(Dha) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

¶11

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment, 2015). The offences which the revisionist has alleged to have committed are detailed in the said F.I.R. On the basis of the same, the revisionist being a juvenile has been in Child Protection Home since 08.04.2024. His bail application has initially been rejected by the Board vide order dated 07.05.2024 in Misc. Application No.26 of 2024 and the appeal filed against the same bearing Criminal Appeal No.26 of 2024 has also been rejected while affirming the bail rejection order.

¶12

Placing reliance on the report of the District Probationary Officer which has been indicated by the learned appellate court in paragraph 21 of the judgment, it is contended that that revisionist being a juvenile, merits to be released on bail. Further contention is that one another co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.1653 of 2024 in Re: Mulayam Yadav Vs. State of U.P. and Another vide order dated 05.06.2024 , a copy of which has been filed as part of annexure 7 of the revision, consequently, the revisionist is also entitled for bail.

¶13

The bail granted to the co-accused in the case of Mulayam Yadav (supra) is also not objected / opposed by the learned A.G.A.

¶14

Considering the aforesaid arguments as well as the report of the District Proabtionary Officer and fact that the another coaccused has already been granted bail by this Court in the case of Mulayam Yadav (supra) and learned A.G.A. having unable to distinguish the case of the revisionist from the case of Mulayam Yadav, as such, I am of the view that the revision deserves to be allowed.

¶15

Accordingly, this revision stands allowed . The order dated

¶16

07.05.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Barabanki and the order dated 06.06.2024 passed by the Juvenile court, Court Room No.44, Barabanki dismissing Criminal Appeal No.26 of 2024 are set aside.

¶17

Let the revisionist-Juvenile be released on bail in Case Crime No.298 of 2023, U/s 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, 304 I.P.C. and U/s 3(2)(V) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Ghunghter, District Barabanki 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 concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) the natural guardian 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 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 concerned.

¶22

It is made clear that the observations made in this order are

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 14.8.2024 S. Shivhare

¶25

Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Juvenile X (Minor) Thru. His Father v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juvenile X (Minor) Thru. His Father v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jay Kishor Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Mahesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Sectt. Lko and 4 Others

Ram Avtar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Ibrahim and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mohammad Zeeshan and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Bindra Prasad Dubey @ Bindra Prasad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another