Allahabad High Court
Shiv Sharma Kishore Apchari Thru. ... vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 26 May, 2022
Bench: Brij Raj Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 221 of 2021
Revisionist :- Shiv Sharma Kishore Apchari Thru. His Father Sri Virendra
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Revisionist :- Gyanendra Singh Sikarwar,Kuldeep Singh Sikarwar,Smriti
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
As per office report dated 18.09.2021, notice has been served upon opposite party no.2, personally, but none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2.
Heard Mr. Iqbal Ali, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Smriti, learned counsel for the revisionist and Mr. Ravish Chandra Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present revision has been preferred with a prayer to allow the present revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 22.02.2021 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Hardoi in Criminal Appeal No.06 of 2021 (C.N.R. No.UPHR 01000807-2021) (Shiv Sharma Vs. State of U.P.) and order dated 17.12.2020 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Hardoi in Case Crime No.264 of 2020, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Tandiyawan, District Hardoi. It is further prayed that to release the revisionist on bail in the custody of his father in aforesaid Case Crime No.264 of 2020.
Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that an F.I.R. was lodged on 10.07.2020 in which allegation of rape was levelled against the revisionist. The trial has commenced and in trial prosecutrix has been examined and she has stated that no rape was committed with her by accused-revisionist and she has been declared hostile. The statement of P.W.-2, brother annexed along with supplementary affidavit indicates that the brother has also been become hostile and after looking his statement there is no allegation of rape is levelled. It has been further submitted that the mother of the prosecutrix, namely, Manju was also examined before the court and she has deposed that she had not given statement of rape, she further stated that no rape was committed with her daughter. He has further submitted that the revisionist has been declared juvenile aged about 14 years. He has further submitted that the accused-revisionist is in home protection since 08.09.2020 and he has got no previous criminal history.
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 submissions, I find that the revisionist may be enlarged on bail.
Accordingly, let the revisionist - Shiv Sharma is directed to be put in the custody of his father 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 parents/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 applicant/revisionist juvenile.
In view of the aforesaid discussion, nothing survives, therefore, I set the order dated 22.02.2021 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Hardoi in Criminal Appeal No.06 of 2021 (C.N.R. No.UPHR 01000807-2021) (Shiv Sharma Vs. State of U.P.) and order dated 17.12.2020 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Hardoi in Case Crime No.264 of 2020, under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Tandiyawan, District Hardoi and revision is allowed.
Order Date :- 26.5.2022
Atul
