Allahabad High Court
Kiran Devi vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 21 July, 2023
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:146065
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3292 of 2022
Revisionist :- Kiran Devi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Ram Bilas Prasad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pavan Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 16.07.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mau in Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 2020 as well as order dated 25.09.2020 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Mau in Case Crime No. 635 of 2020 under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. Police Station Sarai Lakhansi, District Mau.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that learned J.J. Board declared the accused juvenile by order dated 25.09.2020 against which he filed an appeal No. 21 of 2020 before the Children Court, POCSO Act which was dismissed by the learned court by order dated 16.07.2022 without considering the material on record. It is further submitted that during the course of hearing of appeal the statement of C.W. 1 Sakshi Shagufta Yasmin, Head Master, Primary Pathsala, Indarpur was recorded on 12.03.2021 and she filed self-attested copy of admission register attendance register before the learned appellate court after comparing them with the original record and all those papers were taken on record while passing the order as aforesaid the statement as made by C.W. 1 Sakshi Shagufta Yasmin and papers filed by her before the learned appellate court were not taken into consideration, whereas the statement of the witness and papers filed by her were to be considered while passing the order. It was on the learned appellate court to decide the authenticity of those papers and the statement as made by C.W. 1 and then to record his finding but he ignored this fact and relied on the papers which was filed by the accused/ delinquent before the learned J.J. Board for authenticity of those papers was under-challenged before the learned appellate court. In this way, the learned appellate court did not pass the order dated 16.07.2022 on the basis of material on record and in the light of provisions as contained in the law, therefore, the order passed by learned appellate court is liable to be set aside and revision to be allowed.
Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer but admitted the fact that statement of C.W. 1 Sakshi Shagufta Yasmin was recorded before the learned appellate court and papers were also filed by her those were taken on record even though learned appellate court did not consider the aforesaid papers as well as the statement made by C.W. 1 Sakshi Shagufta Yasmin, though this material was also be taken into consideration while passing the orders in question.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, including the orders passed by learned J.J. Board and the appellate court, perusal of record, it appears that, during the course of hearing of appeal the statement of C.W. 1 Sakshi Shagufta Yasmin, Primary Pathsala, Indarpur was also recorded who stated the date of birth of the delinquent as 06.07.2001 on the basis of school record and also filed self-attested copy of admission register, student attendance register after comparing with original records before the learned court but all those papers were not taken into consideration by the learned appellate court while passing the order dated 16.07.2022 which is in question in this revision but the order was passed only on the basis of papers and statement of C.W. 1 Sakshi Shagufta Yasmin was recorded before the learned J.J. Board passed the order while confirming the order of juvenility passed by the learned J.J. Board. Learned appellate court was also required to consider the statement of C.W. 1 Sakshi Shagufta Yasmin and the papers relating to the date of birth of the delinquent and then to pass the appropriate order. On the contrary ignorance of these papers and the statement made by C.W. 1 Sakshi Shagufta Yasmin cannot be said to be lawful, as a result, the order passed by learned appellate court order dated 16.07.2022 cannot be said to be in conformity with law and the material on record. Therefore, it is hereby, set aside and criminal revision is allowed with direction to the learned appellate court to pass the order afresh on the basis of material and evidence on record especially as recorded and filed before the learned appellate court within a period of 60 days after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties.
Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 25.09.2020 and the appellate court dated 16.07.2022 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed.
Order Date :- 21.7.2023
Suraj Srivastav
