Allahabad High Court
K (Juvenile) Thru. The Father Of ... vs The State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. ... on 28 February, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 45 of 2023
Revisionist :- K (Juvenile) Thru. The Father Of Juvenile
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko. And Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Manjeet Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Vide order dated 18.1.2023, notice was issued to the opposite party no.2 and that too has been served upon the opposite party no.2 as per the office report.
Case called out.
None is present on behalf of the opposite party no.2.
The Court is proceeding to hear the matter in the aforesaid circumstances.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri B.N. Nishad, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Instant criminal revision has been filed with the prayer to allow the criminal revision and quash/set-aside the impugned Judgment and order dated 19.12.2022 passed by Additional District Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Pratapgarh in Criminal Appeal No.81 of 2022 as well as order dated 20.9.2022 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh in Bail Application No.66 of 2022 relating to revisionist arising out of Case Crime No.826 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh. Further prayer is made to enlarge the accused-revisionist on bail in the aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant matter. The revisionist is not named in the F.I.R. and his name came into light after the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. He added that had it been a case that the applicant was lastly seen with the deceased, certainly it would have been mentioned in the F.I.R. as the son of the informant never told that the applicant was with the deceased prior to death. He submits that prosecution story is concocted and there is no truthfulness in the story of the prosecution. There is no corroborative evidence against the applicant and he has falsely been implicated by the informant due to annoyance. He next added that the DPO report also favours the contention of the revisionist. The revisionist is in child care home since 27.12.2021. In case the revisionist is enlarged on bail, the guardian of the revisionist undertakes that the revisionist will not again involve himself in committing the offence and the revisionist will always observe good conduct and behaviour.
It is further submitted that the Juvenile Justice Board and also the appellate court while rejecting the bail application overlooked the opinion of the district Probation Officer as also the true spirit and intent of the Legislature as provided under Section 12 of the Act. It is submitted that in the present case, no such contingency as provided in Section 12 of the Act is present; rather contrary to it, the District Probation Officer has opined in favour of the juvenile and no adverse material is available against the revisionist. It is next submitted on behalf of the revisionist that bail to a child in reference to Section 12 of the Act in conflict with law is a rule and denial is an exception.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the legal proposition and submits that the court may pass appropriate order in the best interest of the child.
There is no material on record to indicate that in case the revisionist is released, it would bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice.
Resultantly, the criminal revision is hereby allowed.
The impugned Judgment and order dated 19.12.2022 passed by Additional District Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Pratapgarh in Criminal Appeal No.81 of 2022 and order dated 20.9.2022 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Pratapgarh in Bail Application No.66 of 2022 relating to revisionist arising out of Case Crime No.826 of 2021, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., Police Station Lalganj, District Pratapgarh, are hereby set aside.
It is directed that the the revisionist be released on bail in aforementioned Case Crime No.826 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of concerned Juvenile Justice Board subject to the condition that the father 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 revisionist juvenile.
Order Date :- 28.2.2023
Ram Murti
