Allahabad High Court
Anant Ram @ Lalla Thru. Father ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 25 May, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:37513
Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 85 of 2023
Revisionist :- Anant Ram @ Lalla Thru. Father Pitam
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Bhagwati Prasad Nigam
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Notice was issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per the report, the same has been served.
Case called out. None is present on behalf of opposite party no. 2, thus the Court is proceeding in the aforesaid circumstances.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, 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 order dated 20.12.2022 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 74 of 2022 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Hardoi as well as the order dated 19.11.2022 passed in Bail Application No. 103 of 2022 by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Hardoi by which Bail Application under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act arising out of Case Crime No. 483 of 2022, under Sections 376 of IPC, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Pihani, District Hardoi. Further prayer is made to enlarge the accused-revisionist on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime No. 483 of 2022.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant matter. He next added that the revisionist is 16 years and 4 month of age at the time of the incident and he was not involved in committing the offence he has been implicated only due to enmity. It is an admitted fact that the revisionist was a student of Class 12th and due to his incarceration he is not in a position to pursue his course further. He next added that there are certain discrepancies in the orders impugned as the DPO report has not been considered by the trial Court in its right perspective. He further referred the DPO report as page 46 of the instant revision and submits that the same is not against the revisionist. Further contention of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that the learned trial Court has also not given any finding to the fact that if the revisionist is released, there is reasonable ground for believing that the release is likely to bring the instant revisionist with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. Further the revisionist is in jail since 09.08.2022 and if he is not released on bail his academic career shall be ruined. 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 20.12.2022 passed in Crl. Appeal No. 74 of 2022 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Hardoi as well as the order dated 19.11.2022 passed in Bail Application No. 103 of 2022 by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Hardoi by which Bail Application under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act arising out of Case Crime No. 483 of 2022, under Sections 376 of IPC, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Pihani, District Hardoi are hereby set aside.
It is directed that the the revisionist be released on bail in aforementioned Case Crime No.483 of 2022 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 brother 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 :- 25.5.2023
Anurag
