Allahabad High Court
Aashu vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 June, 2022
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1689 of 2021
Revisionist :- Aashu
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Satyender Kumar Sing,A.C.Srivastava,Ravitendra Pratap Singh Chandel
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Govil
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard Sri A.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist / applicant, Sri Pankaj Kumar Govil, learned counsel for the informant / opposite party no. 2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.
By means of this bail application the revisionist / applicant has prayed to quash the judgment and order dated 15.6.2021 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (1st) POCSO Act, Gautam Budh Nagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 2021 (Aashu VS. State of U.P.) as well as the order dated 16.3.2021 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Guatam Budh Nagar in Case Crime No. 02 of 2021, under sections 302, 201, 394, 411 I.P.C. Police Station-Ecotech-I, District Gautam Budh Nagar. The revisionist / applicant is in jail since 12.1.2021.
Shri A.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist / applicant contends that the revisionist / applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The revisionist / applicant was declared juvenile on 16.3.2021, his age was only 17 years 9 months and one day, at the time of alleged incident. That an F.I.R. was lodged against the revisionist / applicant after six days of the alleged incident without any plausible explanation of delay. The report of the Probation Officer stated that, the revisionist / applicant was studying in Class 10th. That the Investigating Officer did not investigate the matter and falsely submitted the charge-sheet against the revisionist /applicant. He further submits that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the revisionist /applicant on record. As per background history of the revisionist /applicant, no criminal antecedents against anyone of his family members. Falseallegations of offences under the POCSO Act has been made only to aggravate the offence. Learned counsel for the revisionist / applicant contends that the revisionist / applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case. Lastly, it is contended by the learned counsel for revisionist / applicant that the revisionist / applicant shall not abscond and will cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The revisionist / applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.
Learned A.G.A. as well as Shri Pankaj Kumar Govil, learned counsel for the informant could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. They, however, do not dispute the fact that the revisionist / applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.
I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the revisionist / applicant and hold that the revisionist / applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the revisionist / applicant- Aashu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The revisionist / applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The revisionist / applicant will not influence any witness.
(iii) The revisionist / applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The revisionist / applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 9.6.2022
Vibha Singh
