CRLR/305/2021
2022 Latest Caselaw 1354 UK

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

                        29TH APRIL, 2022

            CRIMINAL REVISION NO.305 OF 2021

Between:

Minor, through his Natural Guardian (father)        ...Revisionist

and

State of Uttarakhand.                             ...Respondent

Counsel for the Revisionist :    Mr. Shailabh Pandey.

Counsel for the State      :     Mr. Atul Kumar Shah, learned
                                 Deputy Advocate General for the
                                 State.


Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

This Criminal Revision is directed against the

judgment dated 22.09.2021, passed by the Children Court/F.T.C./

Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, POCSO, Rudrapur,

District Udham Singh Nagar, in Criminal Bail Appeal No.177 of

2021, "Mohd. Kaish (minor) through his father vs. State", whereby,

the appeal has been dismissed.

2. According to the First Information Report, the revisionist

had carnal intercourse against the order of nature with the minor

victim, aged about six years. The FIR (No.196 of 2021 of Police

Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar) was registered

under Section 377 of IPC and Section 5/6 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3. The revisionist had moved an application for bail. On

04.09.2021, the bail application was rejected by the Juvenile

Justice Board, Udham Singh Nagar. An appeal was preferred by the

revisionist against the order of the Juvenile Justice Board. The

appeal has been dismissed by the impugned judgment. Hence, this

Revision.

4. Heard Mr. Shailabha Pandey, learned counsel for the

revisionist and Mr. Atul Kumar Shah, learned Deputy Advocate

General for the State.

5. The learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that

the revisionist has been implicated in this matter and the

prosecution witnesses, the father (PW1), mother (PW2) of the

alleged victim and even the alleged victim (PW3) have not

supported the prosecution story.

6. The learned counsel for the State fairly conceded that

the prosecution witnesses, including the victim, have not supported

the prosecution.

7. In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of

this case, the present Revision is allowed. The impugned order

dated 04.09.2021, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Udham

Singh Nagar, and, the judgment dated 22.09.2021, passed by the

Appellate Court, are hereby set aside. The revisionist is directed to

be released on bail on executing a personal bond through his

natural guardian or near relative, to the satisfaction of the Juvenile

Justice Board, Udham Singh Nagar.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Dt: 29th April, 2022.

Pant/