Allahabad High Court
X vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 19 September, 2023
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:180392
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3238 of 2023
Revisionist :- X
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Saurabh Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rakesh Kuamr Yadav
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned counsel for the opposite party alongwith learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act-2015 (hereinafter referred to as "J.J. Act, 2015) to allow the present revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 07.01.2023 passed by Juvenile Court/Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Sonbhadra passed in Criminal Appeal No.62 of 2022 (Rohit Bharti @ Golu Bharti vs. State of U.P.) as well as the judgment/order dated 07.12.2022 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Sonbhadra passed upon Bail Application No.66/2022 moved in Case Crime No.725 of 2022, under Sections 376AB, 452 I.P.C. & Section 5m/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act-2012, Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra and also prays to release the revisionist/delinquent on bail in the aforesaid case.
It is submitted that in this case the delinquent/applicant was aged about 14 years, 8 months and was juvenile at the time of alleged incident. Further submitted that there was dispute regarding payment of rent between the parents of the victim and the delinquent that was the reason this F.I.R. was lodged against him with false allegation of rape. During medical examination though injury was found on her person but in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate she specifically stated that she neither saw the delinquent to enter in the room nor going him out. It is further submitted that the delinquent never made molestation on any previous occasion with her but she came to know by her mother that delinquent entered his finger in her private part. When specific question was asked by the learned Magistrate to the victim in this regard, she clearly stated that she did not see the delinquent but he was seen by her sister and mother. It is was also admitted by the victim that there was dispute relating to Rs.10,000/- which shows that on account of the said dispute this F.I.R. was lodged with false allegation. The report submitted by the D.P.O. is also not adverse for the present delinquent even though the juvenility of the delinquent was not considered either by the J.J. Board or by the appellate court and also the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the aforesaid Act were not considered by the courts below while passing the aforesaid orders. The delinquent is in Juvenile Care Home since 22.09.2022 (i.e. about one year) and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside the orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the present criminal revision as the orders passed by the courts below cannot be said to be in conformity with law.
Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the provisions as contained u/s 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, the report submitted by the District Probation Officer, the fact that victim did not see the delinquent and the period present delinquent remained in child care home, 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 07.12.2022 and the appellate court dated 07.01.2023 are, hereby, set aside and the present criminal revision is hereby, allowed.
It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail in the aforesaid case 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 natural guardian/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 the father will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.
(ii) The natural guardian/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 natural guardian/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 :- 19.9.2023
Ashok Gupta
