Allahabad High Court
Vishal vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 19 December, 2022
Bench: Jyotsna Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 91
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 815 of 2022
Revisionist :- Vishal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Vinod Kumar Tirpathi,Nimesh Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
01. Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Tirpathi, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri O. P. Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
02. This criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 01.12.2021 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Jaunpur and order dated 27.01.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, (Ananya), Jaunpur in Criminal Appeal No.86 of 2021 affirming the order of J. J. Board declining bail to the juvenile in case crime no.04 of 2020, under Sections 376, 313, 506 and 120 I.P.C. and 5tha/6 and 17/18 POCSO Act, P.S.Chandwak, District Jaunpur.
03. As per prosecution case, a minor girl, when she was coming from her school, was abducted by showing knife to her on 02.05.2019 by the present juvenile and his companion and was sexually assaulted by both of them. It is stated in the F.I.R. lodged by the victim herself that the present juvenile assaulted her several times by extending threats to kill her parents and her brother. On 15.12.2019 she accompanied present juvenile and his companion to the Health Care Centre, Lalganj, District Azamgarh where they came to know that she was pregnant. Her pregnancy was terminated by doctor in collusion with all of them. It is also stated in the F.I.R. that her parents were called at the behest of doctor then she disclosed the incident to her parents. She was medically examined, her statements and statements of other witnesses were recorded and juvenile was chargesheeted under Sections 376, 313, 506 and 120 I.P.C. and 5tha/6 and 17/18 POCSO Act. Finding the present juvenile a minor he was produced before the J.J.Board. His bail application was dismissed. The appeal filed on his behalf was also dismissed. Now the juvenile through his father is before this Court in this criminal revision
04. It is contended that the revisionist has been falsely implicated with ulterior motive. The story as set up by the victim demonstrates that there is no truth in the story. The witnesses have mechanically reiterated the same story as if they have been tutored. It is also stated that the victim is a major and that the F.I.R. has been lodged after a delay of eight months with no explanation as to reasons for delay. Co-accused-his companion, Nanhu, who has been assigned similar role, has already been granted bail by another bench of this Court vide order 10.06.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.13305 of 2020 and that the social investigation report mentions nothing adverse to the character and conduct of the accused.
05. I went through the papers on record and the impugned orders. The J. J. Board has, on the basis of nature of allegations only, drawn upon conclusion that his release will defeat ends of justice and that there was fair probability of his coming into contact with people of criminal antecedent and that his release may expose him to physical, moral and psychological danger.
06. I went through the order of the appellate court. The appellate court has affirmed the order of J.J.Board and agreed with the conclusion drawn by it mainly on the basis of nature of the allegations. The appellate court took into consideration that minor was just marginally below 18 years.
07. These facts are not disputed that the age of the victim was found 18 years in her medical examination; no external or internal injury was found on her person and that the F.I.R. was lodged after delay of eight months with no explanation thereof. In above circumstances, the contention of the juvenile is that he was falsely implicated and that he is innocent assume importance. The social investigation report says that he had no criminal antecedents. The concluding para of social investigation report points towards opposite direction which favours the side of the accused. This is not disputed that he has been in custody since 17.01.2020. Co-accused Nanhu, who has been assigned similar role and active participation in the incident, has been granted bail. In my view, conclusions have been drawn by J.J.Board and appellate court bringing the case within the restrictive confines of Section 12 (1) of J.J.Act, 2015 without any substantive material to arrive at the same. The revisionist has already been incarcerated for about 3 years now.
08. In view of the above, especially, in view of the period of incarceration already undergone, the revision is allowed. The judgment and order dated 01.12.2021 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Jaunpur and order dated 27.01.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, (Ananya), Jaunpur are hereby set aside.
09. Let the revisionist, minor "X' through his natural guardian/father Ramesh, resident of Eklakhi, Mandupur, P.S. Chandwak, District Jaunpur, be released on bail in Case Crime No.04 of 2020, under Sections 376, 313, 506 and 120 I.P.C. and 5tha/6 and 17/18 POCSO Act, P.S.Chandwak, District Jaunpur upon his father Ramesh furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of his relatives, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Jaunpur subject to the following conditions:
(i) that the natural guardian/father Ramesh 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 father will ensure that the juvenile will not indulge in any criminal activity;
(ii) The revisionist shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;
(iii) The revisionist through guardian shall also file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court;
(iv) The District Probation Officer will keep strict vigil on the activities of the revisionist and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board, Jaunpur on such periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.
10. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are 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.
Order Date :- 19.12.2022
Asha
