Allahabad High Court
X- Juvenile vs State Of U.P. And Another on 14 December, 2023
Author: Subhash Chandra Sharma
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:236715
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2687 of 2023
Revisionist :- X- Juvenile
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Dinesh Kumar Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his natural guardian with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 27.04.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Meerut in Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 2023 as well as order dated 20.03.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 17 of 2023 under Section 307 I.P.C. and Section 9(1)A(1)/25(2)/5/27 Arms Act, Police Station Mawana, District Meerut.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 17 years and 12 days at the time of alleged incident. It is further submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the F.I.R. by the informant for causing firearm injury to her daughter aged about 16 years while travelling on a bus. It is further submitted that the statement of the victim herself was recorded by the I.O. and statements of other witnesses were also recorded. There is contradiction in the statements of the witnesses, therefore they cannot be said to be reliable. The firearm injury was found on the left shoulder of the victim which shows that there was no intention to commit her murder. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.
4. It is further submitted that the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile Justice Board even the report submitted by Probation Officer was also not considered. The appellate court has also not considered all these facts but rejected the appeal without applying its judicial mind and considering the law as contained u/s 12 of the aforesaid Act. He is in Child Care Home since 14.01.2023 i.e. more than ten months and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision.
5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the revisionist was aged about 17 years and 12 days and was in a capacity to understand the nature of the offence he committed and was also mature. He proposed the victim for marriage prior to the alleged incident which she denied as a result he became annoyed and on the date of incident in a bus in which passengers were travelling he committed the incident by making fire on her with Tamancha to commit her murder. The incident cannot be said to have taken place accidentally but it was committed intentionally and with the knowledge of consequences of the act. It is also contended that pistol was also recovered from the alleged incident. The medical report also show the firearm injury on her person and blackening was also present on the wound which shows that it was caused from very close place. There is lack of control of parents over the activities of the revisionist and in case he released in custody of father of the revisionist he will again commit the similar offence, therefore he is not entitled for release from custody.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, perusal of record, the age of the accused, the nature of offence and D.P.O report and the lack of control of parents there appears no ground to release the revisionist from custody. In this regard, the learned J.J. Board as well as learned appellate court passed the orders after considering all these facts, therefore, it does not require any interference by this Court but this criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.
7. Accordingly, this criminal revision is, hereby, dismissed.
Order Date :- 14.12.2023
Suraj Srivastav
