Uttarakhand High Court
Shivam Goswami vs State Of Uttarakhand on 10 April, 2024
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Revision No. 121 of 2024
Shivam Goswami ...Revisionist
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
Present:-
Mr. Ayush Agrawal, Advocate for the revisionist.
Mr. Akshay Latwal, Brief Holder, for the State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The challenge in this revision is made to the
followings:-
(i) Order dated 07.10.2023 passed by the
the Juvenile Justice Board, Nainital
("JJB"), by which the bail application of
the revisionist in FIR No. 399 of 2023,
under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) IPC
and Section 5(l)/6 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012, P.S. Haldwani, District Nainital
has been rejected ("the case"); and
(ii) Judgment and order dated 07.11.2023
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 14 of
2023, Shivam Goswami v. State, by the
Special Judge (POCSO)/Additional
District Judge/FTC, Haldwani,
Nainital, by which the appeal has been
dismissed and the order dated
07.10.2023 passed in the case has
been upheld.
2. The revisionist is Child in Conflict with law
("CIL"). The case is based on an FIR lodged by the
informant, according to which, the victim, a young girl aged
about 15 years had left her house on 03.08.2023 at 08:30
p.m., but she did not return. Subsequently, it is the
prosecution case that the CIL had enticed her.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
4. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit
that there is nothing against the revisionist; he has been
denied bail in defiance of the provisions of the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 ("the
Act"). He would submit that the Social Investigation Report
also does not reveal anything against the revisionist.
5. Learned State Counsel would submit that Social
Investigation Report does not reveal anything against the
revisionist.
6. It is a bail of a CIL. The bail in such matters is
governed by Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 ("the Act"). According to it,
notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, the CIL shall be released on bail in each
case, subject to certain riders. A CIL may be released on
bail, unless there are reasonable grounds to believe that it is
likely to bring the CIL into association to any known
criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological
danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice.
7. The Act ensures that the best interest of the child
is to be maintained. Section 3 of the Act lays down the
general principles, which are to be followed in the
administration of the Act. Presumption of innocence is one
of them. What is most important is principle of best interest
and principle of family responsibility. According to the
principle of family responsibility, the primary responsibility
of care, nurture and protection of the child shall be that of
the biological family or adoptive or foster parents, as the
case may be. The Court may not go into the reasons for
enacting such an Act. Understandably, it has been so
enacted so as to ensure proper and overall growth of a child
with dignity, affection and Care.
8. The Social Investigation Report of the revisionist
is on record. It does not reveal anything against the
revisionist. Nothing adverse has been reported in the Social
Investigation Report.
9. Having considered the Social Investigation Report
and all other attending circumstances, this Court is of the
view that in this case, there is no impediment in the grant
of bail to the CIL. Accordingly, the revision deserves to be
allowed.
10. The revision is allowed. The impugned judgment
and orders are set aside.
11. The CIL be given into the custody of his mother
subject to production of two reliable sureties. The mother of
the CIL shall also give an undertaking that she shall take
care of the CIL and shall not allow him to contact any of the
witnesses or their family members. The mother of the CIL
shall also undertake that she shall also not contact either
the witnesses or any of their family members.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
10.04.2024
Avneet/
