Allahabad High Court
X- Minor vs State Of Up And 3 Others on 15 May, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:87815
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 849 of 2024
Revisionist :- X- Minor
Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others
Counsel for Revisionist :- Jitendra Singh,Sunil Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
1. Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri L.D. Rajbhar, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. This criminal revision has been filed for setting aside the judgment and order dated 05.01.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Siddharth Nagar and order dated 02.02.2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Juvenile Court, Siddharth Nagar in Criminal Appeal No. 01 of 2024 affirming the order of J. J. Board declining bail to the juvenile in case crime no. 291 of 2023, under Sections 363, 376(3) I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Dumariyaganj, District- Siddharth Nagar.
3. As per version in the F.I.R. lodged by mother of a minor girl, his daughter aged 16 years did not return to her house; when she did not return, the first informant and her family members went in search of her but couldn't find her; later on they came to know that the juvenile/accused enticed her away; on the basis of this FIR, case crime no. 291 of 2023, under Sections 363, 504, 506 I.P.C. was lodged; the girl was recovered and her statement under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded; finding involvement of the juvenile in the matter, he has been apprehended and finding him below 18 years, he was produced before the Juvenile Justice Board; his application for release has been dismissed; the appeal filed challenging the aforesaid order has also been dismissed; now the juvenile, through his mother is before this court in this criminal revision.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the revisionist that no offence against him is made out as the statements given by the victim, fully exonerated him. It is contended that during the investigation, the victim refused to undergo a medical examination; Nothing has been found in the social investigation report to bring this case within the scope of exceptions as provided in proviso to Section 12(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and that the kind of evidence which has come against the juvenile do not prima facie reveal commission of offence at all and therefore the Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court fell in error in declining bail to him. The accused/juvenile is in observation home since last 6 months.
5. Learned AGA has opposed prayer for bail.
6. I went through the material on record, including the statements given by the alleged victim as well as the social investigation report. The victim said that she accompanied the accused out of her own free will and volition. The J.J.Board has declined bail on the basis of the observations that in case he is released, there is possibility that he will be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger and that he may come in association with some known criminal and that his release would defeat ends of justice. Learned appellate court seems to have agreed with this observation. In none of the orders any material has been mentioned on the basis whereof such observations were made bringing the matter within the three exclusionary clauses as provided in proviso to Section 12 of the J.J.Act. It is settled law 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. The judgment and order dated 05.01.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Siddharth Nagar and order dated 02.02.2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Juvenile Court, Siddharth Nagar, are hereby set aside.
8. Let the revisionist, 'X- Minor' through his natural guardian (mother) resident of Village Naudihawa (Paranpur), Police Station-Dumariyaganj, District-Siddharth Nagar be released on bail upon his mother furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board, Siddharth Nagar subject to the following conditions:
(i) that the natural guardian (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 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;
(iii) The revisionist through guardian shall also 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;
(iv) The District Probation Officer will keep strict vigil on the activities of the revisionist and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board, Siddharth Nagar on such periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.
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 :- 15.5.2024
#Vikram/-/Sumit Kumar
