Allahabad High Court
Juvenile P vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 9 May, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:83768
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1161 of 2024
Revisionist :- Juvenile P
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Akhil Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
1. Heard Akhil Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 01.12.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Farrukhabad and order dated 06.12.2023 passed by Special Judge POCSO Act, in Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 2023 affirming the order of J. J. Board declining bail to the juvenile in Case Crime No. 176 of 2023 under Sections 456, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, P.S. Rajepur, District- Farrukhabad.
3. As per the version in the F.I.R. in the night of 28.10.2023 at 11 P.M., the revisionist and the other co-accused allegedly climbed over the boundary wall and forcefully dragged away the daughter and niece of the first informant to the nearby fields and molested them. The family members found them missing and searched for them then the boys ran away extending abuses. During investigation statements of the victims under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded. They were put to medical examination. Finding the accused/revisionist involved in the matter below 18 years of age, he was produced before the J.J. Board. The application moved on his behalf for his release into care and custody of his father/mother was rejected. The appeal preferred challenging the order of the J.J. Board was also dismissed declining him bail. Now, the juvenile, through his father/mother is before this court in this criminal revision.
4. It is contended on behalf of the revisionist that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case for some ulterior motives as the F.I.R. has been lodged after four days of incident. The delay has not been explained. The victim is aged about 18 years and the accused/revisionist is 17 years and 8 months. The statements given by the victim is not reliable. Further the medical examination does not show any kind of injury pointing towards any physical or sexual assault as alleged to have been committed on her. There is nothing material so as to dissuade the J.J. Board and the appellate court from granting him bail. It is argued that the J.J. Board as well as the appellate court have conveniently ignored the settled principles of law while declining him bail. In fact bail to the juvenile has been refused on the basis of the inferences drawn without having any material to substantiate them therefore, such orders are unsustainable in law. The juvenile accused is in custody since 8.11.2023 i.e. for more than 6 months now.
5. Learned A.G.A has opposed prayer for bail. However, most of the factual situation as mentioned above could not be refuted.
6. I went through the contents of the F.I.R., statements given by the victim under section 161/164 Cr.P.C. medical examination report and all other materials available on record. The juvenile is a school going boy aged about 17 years and 8 months where as the victim is about 18 years of age. There is no material observation as regard his conduct, behaviour or antecedents which may have counted with the court or the J.J. Board to bring the matter of grant of bail within the three exceptional circumstances as provided in proviso to section 12 of the J.J. Act, 2015. In fact, there is no material which, in my view, could have dissuaded the court or the J.J. Board from granting bail or release to his parents. The settled law is that whenever a minor, who is alleged to have committed an offence, is apprehended and produced before the board, he shall be released on bail unless the release is likely to bring him in association with any known criminal or there is likelihood of exposure to moral or psychological danger or that such release would defeat ends of justice.
7. In view of the above, the revision is allowed and the order dated 01.12.2023 passed by the J.J. Board in Case Crime No. 176 of 2023 under Sections 456, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, P.S. Rajepur, District- Farrukhabad. and order dated 06.12.2023 passed by the appellate court in Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 2023, are hereby set aside.
8. Let the revisionist, minor 'P' through his natural guardian father Sher Singh resident of village Patti Darapur, P.S.-Rajpur, District- Farrukhabad be released on bail in Case Crime No. 176 of 2023 under Sections 456, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and section3/4(2) POCSO Act, P.S. Rajepur, District- Farrukhabad upon his father/mother furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Farrukhabad subject to the following conditions:
(i) that the natural guardian father/mother will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the juvenile will not be permitted to come 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/mother will ensure that the juvenile will not indulge in any criminal activity;
(ii) The revisionist shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;
9. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court/J.J.Board shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led, uninfluenced by any finding or observation whatsoever in this order.
Order Date :- 9.5.2024
Sumit Kumar
