Akash Yadav Under Guardianship ... vs State Of U.P. And Anr.
2022 Latest Caselaw 548 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 16
 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 885 of 2021
 
Revisionist :- Akash Yadav Under Guardianship Shri Shivpal Yadav
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Rahul Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

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

The present revision has been preferred against the orders, being judgment and order dated 11.11.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Lucknow, in Criminal Appeal No. 149 of 2021 affirming the judgment of the Juvenile Justice Board, Lucknow dated 21.09.2021 by which the Board rejected the Misc. Case No. 108 of 2021 and denied to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 252 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201, 34 I.P.C. and 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Malihabad, District Lucknow.

Counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist was not named in the F.I.R. and the statement of the father of the victim was also recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and in that statement he did not name the revisionist. It has been further submitted by the counsel for the revisionist that on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Mohammad Kaif, the name of the applicant has come into light but the role of making assault, has been assigned to co-accused Vishal and there is no specific role assigned to the revisionist insofar as the commission of offence is concerned. Counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that the report of the Probation Officer is also not adverse against the revisionist. It has further been submitted that the revisionist is in jail since 16.06.2021 and has no previous criminal antecedents.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not point out anything material to substantiate his contention and rebut the submissions advanced by the counsel for the revisionist.

In view of the aforesaid, the criminal revision is liable to be allowed and the revisionist be enlarged on bail.

Accordingly, the revision is allowed. The impugned orders dated 11.11.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Lucknow, in Criminal Appeal No. 149 of 2021 affirming the judgment of the Juvenile Justice Board, Lucknow dated 21.09.2021 by which the Board rejected the Misc. Case No. 108 of 2021 and denied to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 252 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201, 34 I.P.C. and 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Malihabad, District Lucknow, are set aside.

The revisionist, namely, Akash Yadav is directed to be put in the custody of his guardian and be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Juvenile Justice Board subject to the condition that the parent/guardian of the revisionist will take care of his education and betterment and will not allow to indulge him in any criminal activity and will keep constant check on his activities. Both the sureties are directed to be close relatives of the revisionist juvenile.

Order Date :- 6.4.2022

Arun K. Singh