Allahabad High Court
X- Juvenile vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 June, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:101110
Court No. - 82
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 715 of 2024
Revisionist :- X- Juvenile
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.
1.Pursuant to various orders passed in this criminal revision on previous occasions, service report has been brought on record by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad, according to which notice issued to opposite party No. 2 has been personally served upon her.
2. No one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No. 2 and holding the service of notice as sufficient upon her, the Court proceeds to hear this matter finally.
3. Heard Shri Arun Kumar Tripathi, holding brief of Shri Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the opposite party No. 1.
4. The present criminal revision under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 read with Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 19.01.2024 passed by learned Juvenile Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 3, Ghaziabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 184 of 2023 (Juvenile 'X' Vs. State of U.P. and another), and against order dated 05.12.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad in bail application No. 105 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 447 of 2023, under Sections 307, 302, 34 IPC, Police Station Teela Mod, District Ghaziabad whereby the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad as well as learned appellate court have refused the prayer of bail of accused-applicant.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court towards first information report dated 04.08.2023, which was registered against unknown persons under Section 307 IPC and the offence alleged was said to be causing injuries to the son of the informant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the informant, in her statement, clearly stated that three persons had entered into scuffle with her son on 03.08.2023 and the role of the present applicant was stated to be of catching hold of the injured; the injuries with knife were caused by another person. Learned counsel further submits that other co-accused, against whom main allegation of causing injury to the injured was levelled, has already been granted bail by order dated 19.01.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 3, Ghaziabad in Criminal Appeal No. 178 of 2023, however, on the same day, criminal appeal filed by the applicant bearing No. 184 of 2023 was dismissed. Learned counsel also submits that once the main accused, against whom main role of causing injury by knife has been attributed, was granted bail and his appeal was allowed and the only allegation against the applicant is that of catching hold and not relating to causing alleged injuries to the victim, dismissal of appeal of the applicant is not according to law.
6. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the role of other accused persons involved in the commission of alleged offence was thoroughly examined by the court below had having found distinctive features, the bail application of the applicant has rightly been rejected and the appeal does not warrant any interference by this Court.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is convinced that first information report was lodged against unknown persons and the name of the applicant surfaced during the course of investigation, but the informant, who is mother of the victim, made a clear statement regarding role of the applicant to be that of catching hold of the victim whereas the specific role of causing injury was assigned to the appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 178 of 2023, which has been allowed by the court below.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and no opposition having been made by the informant-side and the entire material on record including the role assigned to the applicant and the order passed in Criminal Appeal No. 178 of 2023, the Court finds that dismissal of appeal filed by the applicant is not justified and amounts to discrimination with no cogent adverse material.
9. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order dated 19.01.2024 passed by learned Juvenile Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 3, Ghaziabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 184 of 2023 (Juvenile 'X' Vs. State of U.P. and another), and the order dated 05.12.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad in bail application No. 105 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 447 of 2023, under Sections 307, 302, 34 IPC, Police Station Teela Mod, District Ghaziabad are hereby set aside.
10. The present criminal revision is allowed.
11. Let the applicant "X"(Juvenile), son of Sanjay, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;
(ii) The applicant through guardian shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law;
(iii) The applicant, through guardian, shall remain present before the trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence without sufficient cause, the trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Order Date :- 3.6.2024
Sazia
(Kshitij Shailendra,J.)
