Allahabad High Court
X (Minor) vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 December, 2023
Author: Subhash Chandra Sharma
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:240359
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2204 of 2021
Revisionist :- X (Minor)
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Brijesh Kumar Pandey,Abdul Mazeed,Balram Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Pandey,Pranay Krishna
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Third supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the revisionist is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned counsel for the Narcotics Control Bureau (opposite party no. 2) alongwith learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as "J.J. Act, 2015) to allow the present revision and quash the impugned judgment and order dated 16.01.2021 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.25 (Exclusive Court) Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Appeal No.89 of 2020 (Javed Akhatar Versus Narcotics Control Bureau Lucknow and another) as well as order dated 19.12.2020 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Kanpur Nagar in Case Crime No.20 of 2020, under Sections 8, 18, 29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station-NCB, District-Lucknow and also prays to release the revisionist/delinquent on bail in the aforesaid case.
It is submitted that in this case the revisionist/delinquent/applicant was aged about 17 years and was juvenile at the time of alleged incident. The delinquent is in Juvenile Care Home since 25.07.2020 i.e. about three and half years. Further submitted that the revisionist is said to be a cleaner on the truck from which poppy straw, quantity 925.300 kgs in 59 plastic bags, was recovered. The driver of the said truck was Ahmad Ali. The fact that there was poppy straw in the bags those were logged in the truck was not in the knowledge of present revisionist, he was working there only as a cleaner. It is further submitted that about three and half years have elapsed, but till now trial has not near to conclusion. On 26.05.2023, only charge has been framed by learned court below and even a single witness has not been examined before the learned court below till now. In this way, the trial of the case is also not possible in near future, but the revisionist is languishing in jail. The report submitted by the D.P.O. is also not adverse for the present delinquent even though the juvenility of the delinquent was not considered either by the J.J. Board or by the appellate court and also the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the aforesaid Act were not considered by the courts below while passing the aforesaid orders. The delinquent's psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside the orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the present criminal revision as the orders passed by the courts below cannot be said to be in conformity with law.
Learned counsel for the Narcotics Control Bureau as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the regular bail application of the driver Ahmad Ali has already been rejected by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court keeping in view the huge quantity of poppy straw said to be recovered from the truck, on which the Ahmad Ali was the driver and the present revisionist was the cleaner and in case revisionist is released on bail, he will again come in association with smugglers.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the provisions as contained u/s 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, the report submitted by the District Probation Officer, the duration revisionist was retained in child care home and the progress of trial, it appears that Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court had not considered the relevant provisions and the material on record in well manner but passed the orders without applying their judicial mind. In this way, there appears ground in this revision and the orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as learned appellate court are liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 19.12.2020 and the appellate court dated 16.01.2021 are, hereby, set aside and the present criminal revision is hereby, allowed.
It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case on executing person bond by the revisionist (father of the delinquent) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on following conditions :-
(i) The natural guardian/father will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionist will not be permitted to go 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 repeat the offence.
(ii) The natural guardian/father will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level which he would be encouraged to do besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits.
(iii) Juvenile and the natural guardian/father will report to the Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month.
(iv) The Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on such a periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.
Order Date :- 19.12.2023
Sunil Kr. Gupta
