Uttarakhand High Court
Harshit Chandra Arya vs State Of Uttarakhand on 17 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Criminal Revision No. 563 of 2023
Harshit Chandra Arya S/o Late Sri Mohan Ram
......Revisionist
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ........Respondent
Present:- Mr. Manoj Mohan, Advocate for the revisionist.
Mr. S.S. Adhikari, Deputy A.G. along with Ms. Shivangi
Gangwar, Brief Holder for the State.
Dated : 17.08.2023
Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J. (Oral)
The challenge in this revision is made to the
following:-
(i) Order dated 16.06.2023, passed in Criminal
Case No.77 of 2023, State vs. Harshit Chandra
Arya, under Section 363, 366 & 376(2)< and 5(B)/6
of the Protection from Children from Sexual
Offences Act, Police Station Kaladhungi, District
Nainital, by the Juvenile Justice Board, District
Haridwar and;
(ii) The judgment and order dated 22.07.2023,
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2023, passed
by the court of Special Judge (POCSO)/Additional
District Judge/F.T.C., Haldwani, Nainital. By it,
the appeal has been dismissed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the revisionist would
submit that at the time of the incident the revisionist is
juvenile; that, the revisionist/juvenile and prosecutrix were
in love affair with each other, therefore, the prosecutrix has
left her parental house and ran away with the revisionist
with her own free will and volition, therefore, it is not a case
of kidnapping and rape as alleged by the prosecution. He
would further submit that the revisionist is languishing in
juvenile Reforms Home since 08.04.2023. He would further
submit that the report of Probation Officer is routine in
nature and there is nothing with his report to show that if
the revisionist is released on bail then he would surrounded
back circumstances, which may injure his mental moral
health; the revisionist has no criminal antecedent. There is
no impediment in releasing him on bail.
4. Learned State counsel would oppose the
revision by submitting that the allegations against the
revisionist are serious in nature and the prosecutrix was
recovered from the possession of the revisionist, however,
he admitted that the report of Probation Officer does not
reveal anything against the revisionist.
5. In the matters of juvenile, bail is essentially a
Rule. As per Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, a juvenile must be
released on bail irrespective of the fact as to whether he is
involved in bailable or non-bailable offence. The only rider
is given under the proviso to Section 12(1) of the Act,
according to which, if the release of the juvenile may bring
him in the association of any known criminal or it would be
dangerous to his psychological development or it may defeat
the ends of justice, such juvenile may not be released on
bail.
6. The principles on which the Act has been
enacted are given under Section 3 of the Act. According to
it, the primary responsibility of nurturing, care and
protection of a child in conflict in law lies with this
biological family or adoptive family, as the case may be.
7. As a result, the Criminal Revision is allowed. The
orders, under challenge, are set aside. The juvenile in
conflict with law (revisionist) shall be enlarged on bail,
subject to production of two reliable sureties and personal
bond to be executed by the sister of the revisionist to the
satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board/Court concerned.
It is further directed that the custody of the
juvenile/revisionist shall be given to his sister. The sister of
the revisionist shall also give an undertaking that she shall
take care of the revisionist and shall not allow him to
contact any of the witnesses or their family members. The
sister of the revisionist shall also undertake that she shall
also not contact either the witnesses or any of their family
members.
8. Pending applications, if any, would stand
disposed of.
(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.)
17.08.2023
Mamta
