Allahabad High Court
X (Minor) vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 October, 2023
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:201614
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2841 of 2023
Revisionist :- X (Minor)
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Dev Prakash Sharma,Priyanka Devi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajveer Chaurasiya
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 through his father with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 26.04.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Mahoba in Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 2023 as well as order dated 13.04.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board,Mahoba. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 88 of 2023 under Section 363, 366, 376(3), 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar Mahoba, DistrictMahoba.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 16 at the time of alleged incident. It is further submitted that the victim was aged about 18 and was in relation with the revisionist. On the date of incident she went with the revisionist voluntarily to Chandrika Devi temple and stayed there but no any physical relations were established between both of them. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate in which she also disclosed the fact that she was in relation with the revisionist three years prior to the alleged incident and she used to meet with him. On the date of incident she went to the temple as aforesaid and stayed there in a Jungle but there is no allegation that she was subjected to rape or force or violence was used against her but she categorically stated that no any force was used by the revisionist against her but she was caught by the police. This shows that she was volunteer and willy and no any offence was committed by the revisionist himself with her. 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 12.03.2023 i.e. more than six months 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 counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that the victim was minor at the time of alleged incident and taken away by the revisionist by enticing her and also physical relations were established. 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, submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties 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 13.04.2023 and the appellate court dated 26.04.2023 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 (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 revisionist/ 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 thefather will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.
(ii) The revisionist/ 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 revisionist/ 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 :- 18.10.2023
Suraj Srivastav
