Allahabad High Court
Shivam Chauhan @ Sachin Chauhan ... vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 6 April, 2022
Bench: Brij Raj Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 764 of 2021
Revisionist :- Shivam Chauhan @ Sachin Chauhan Thru. His Mother Sunita
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Ors.
Counsel for Revisionist :- Vijay Shankar Padey,Shesh Nath Tiwari
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 21.09.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge III, POCSO Act, Faizabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2021 (Shivam Chauhan alias Sachin Chauhan Vs. State of U.P.), affirming the judgment of the Juvenile Justice Board, Faizabad dated 26.07.2021 by which the Board denied to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 109 of 2020, under Sections 354, 386, 306, 67B, 376D, 376B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act as well as Sections 5/6, 7/8 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya, District Faizabad/Ayodhya.
Counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist was not named in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that the age of the revisionist was about 11 years at the time of incident and the revisionist has not committed the offence. Counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is in jail since 14.02.2020 and the maximum punishment is up to three years. It is further argued that the name of the revisionist came into light on the statement made by co-accused Sushant Chaubey, who has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Revision No. 561 of 2020 on 14.09.2021 contained at page 38 of the paper book.
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.
I have perused the bail order of the co-accused and considered the submissions of the counsel for the revisionist and is of the view that the criminal revision is liable to be allowed and the revisionist be enlarged on bail.
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 21.09.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge III, POCSO Act, Faizabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2021 (Shivam Chauhan alias Sachin Chauhan Vs. State of U.P.), affirming the judgment of the Juvenile Justice Board, Faizabad dated 26.07.2021 by which the Board denied to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 109 of 2020, under Sections 354, 386, 306, 67B, 376D, 376B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Act as well as Sections 5/6, 7/8 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya, District Faizabad/Ayodhya, are set aside.
The revisionist, namely, Shivam Chauhan @ Sachin Chauhan is directed to be put in the custody of his mother 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
