Allahabad High Court
X-Juvenile vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 October, 2023
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:200568
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5002 of 2022
Revisionist :- X-Juvenile
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Raghavendra Pati Tripathi,Mansa Singh,Ulajhan Singh Bind
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Krishna Kumar Shukla,Rajeev Pandey,Vijay Kumar Pandey,Vineeta Devi
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the revisionist is taken on record.
List revised.
None appeared for the opposite party even in the revised call but illness slip for Sri Vijay Kumar Pandey learned Advocate appearing for the opposite party has been sent. Since three other names of learned Advocates have also been shown on behalf of the opposite party in the cause list though none appeared to argue the case.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his mother with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 01.11.2022 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act), Jhansi in Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2022 as well as order dated 08.08.2022 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Jhansi. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 50 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 325, 504, 506, 324 I.P.C., Police Station Uldan, District Jhansi.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 15 years at the time of alleged incident. It is further submitted that as per allegation in F.I.R. the revisionist was named with other four co-accused persons for causing injuries to the injured Mulayam Singh. It is further submitted that the injuries found on the person of the injured were simple in nature though caused on the head but not fatal to his life. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.
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 28.04.2022 i.e. more than one and a half years 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.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and urged that in this case specific role was assigned to the present revisionist for assaulting with an axe and others were not assigned such role, therefore, the case of the present revisionist cannot be said to be on the similar footing to the other other co-accused persons. In this regard, the orders passed by the learned J.J. Board as well as learned appellate court cannot be said to be unlawful, therefore, he cannot be said to be entitled for bail and revision, being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.
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 provisions as contained u/s 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, the report submitted by the Probation Officer, 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 08.08.2022 and the appellate court dated 01.11.2022 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed.
It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail on executing person bond by the revisionist ( mother 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 revisionist/ mother 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 mother will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.
(ii) The revisionist/ mother 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 revisionist/ mother 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 :- 17.10.2023
Suraj Srivastav
