Juvenile Delinquents X (1) Thru. His Grandmother (Nani) in Case Crime No. 191/2023 and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47861

Court No. - 11

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 125 of 2024

Revisionist :- Juvenile Delinquents X (1) Thru. His Grandmother (Nani) In Case Crime No. 191/2023 And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Revisionist :- Yugal Kishor Tripathi,Anil Kumar Yadav,Santosh Kumar Dubey,Sher Bahadur Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶7

Considering the office report dated 10.04.2025, this Court finds that the service of notice upon the respondent no. 2 is sufficient. However, no one appeared on behalf of respondent no.2 to oppose the present revision. In this view of the matter, this Court proceeded to hear the instant revision.

¶8

This criminal revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short "Act of 2015") has been filed against the judgment and order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned Court of Special Judge, Juvenile Court, Pratapgarh, in Criminal Appeal No.86/2023, which was preferred against the order dated 18.09.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh, in Bail Application No. 42/2023, in Case Crime No. 191 of 2023, under Section 302, 323 IPC, Police Station- Antu, District- Pratapgarh.

¶9

Learned counsel for the revisionists has submitted that the revisionists have been falsely implicated in the case, inasmuch as, the revisionists have not committed any offence as alleged and the prosecution story is false, concocted and misconceived.

¶10

It is further stated that the revisionists, juveniles, are languishing in jail since 25.05.2023 and they are having no criminal history, which has not been opposed by the side opposite, and as per Section 18(1)(g) of the Act of 2015, the maximum punishment which could be awarded to a juvenile is three years and as such, taking note of the period of incarceration, the juveniles are entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

He further stated that co-accused namely Dinesh Saroj has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 26.02.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 1837 of 2024, copy of bail order of co-accused placed before this Court is taken on record. In these circumstances, the revisionists are also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned orders are liable to be

¶12

set aside and the revision is liable to be allowed.

¶13

Learned AGA for the State, on the other hand, submitted that no illegality has been committed by both the courts below as there was ample evidence against the revisionist, but they have not disputed the above submissions of learned counsel for the revisionist.

¶14

Thus having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case as also the period of incarceration i.e. two years and two months as also that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed .

¶15

The impugned judgment and order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned Court of Special Judge, Juvenile Court, Pratapgarh, in Criminal Appeal No.86/2023, which was preferred against the order dated 18.09.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh, in Bail Application No. 42/2023, in Case Crime No. 191 of 2023, under Section 302, 323 IPC, Police Station- Antu, District- Pratapgarh, are hereby set aside.

¶16

Let Juvenile Delinquents X (1) Thru. His Grandmother (Nani) In Case Crime No. 191/2023 And Juvenile Delinquents X (2) Thru. His Grandmother (Nani) In Case Crime No. 191/2023 of aforesaid Case Crime Number be enlarged on bail, in the above mentioned case on executing a personal bond by their father/natural guardian with two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court/Board concerned and on submission of undertaking on affidavit by his grandmother that he will take due care of the juvenile, will not allow their to indulge in any unlawful or criminal activity or join the company of unlawful elements, will keep their under strict control, shall not attempt or tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses, shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence, shall remain present before the trial Court on each date fixed either personally or through their counsel, failing which, the order of bail granted to Juvenile may be cancelled.

¶17

For a period of one year from today, the Juveniles shall appear before the District Probation Officer concerned along with his natural guardian on 10th of every month.

¶18

Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Mohit Singh/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Juvenile Delinquents X (1) Thru. His Grandmother (Nani) in Case Crime No. 191/2023 and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Juvenile Delinquents X (1) Thru. His Grandmother (Nani) in Case Crime No. 191/2023 and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd. Shahid @ Bablu Kujad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Arun Kumar Mishra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vikas Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Juvenile X Thru. His Father vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Juvenile R, Thru. His Father vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Aniket Kumar Thru. His Father Balgovind vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others