Uttarakhand High Court
"P" vs State Of Uttarakhand on 10 January, 2024
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
10TH JANUARY, 2024
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 561 of 2023
"P", child in conflict with law through his Father .....Revisionist
Versus
State of Uttarakhand ...Respondent
Counsel for the Revisionist : Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Senior
Advocate, assisted by Mr.
Pavan Kumar Nath, Advocate.
Counsel for the State : Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Brief
Holder.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
The proposed Revision has been preferred under
Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 (in short, "Act, 2015") challenging the
judgment dated 05.07.2023, passed by learned
F.T.C./Additional District and Sessions Judge (POCSO)
Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Bail Appeal
No.91 of 2023, whereby, the learned Appellate Court has
dismissed the Appeal and affirmed the order dated
22.05.2023, passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Udham Singh
Nagar (in short, "Board") in Bail Application No.42 of 2023,
filed through his father under Section 12 of the Act, 2015 in
respect of Case Crime No.75 of 2023, registered at police
station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, was rejected.
2. Revisionist is detained in the Observation Home for
the offence under Sections 363, 376, 506 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860 and Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Protection
of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. Heard Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, learned Senior Advocate
assisted by Mr. Pavan Kumar Nath, learned counsel for the
revisionist and Mr. Sandeep Sharma, learned Brief Holder for
the State.
4. Admit.
5. Learned Senior Advocate submitted that the
revisionist has been falsely implicated in the present matter.
The medical report of the alleged victim does not support the
case of the prosecution. Revisionist was a regular student of
Inter College. He does not have any criminal antecedents. He
is a permanent resident of District Almora, therefore, there is
no chance of his absconding, and, he has been in Observation
Home since 02.02.2023.
6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the
Revision. However, he has fairly conceded that as per the
Social Investigation Report, the revisionist's conduct and
behavior are good and there is nothing on record to indicate
that the revisionist had earlier been involved in any
unacceptable activities.
7. Undisputedly, the revisionist was juvenile at the time
of the alleged offence. Section 12 of the Act, 2015 deals with
bail to juvenile, which reads as under:-
"12. Bail to a person who is apparently a child
alleged to be in conflict with law. -(1) When any
person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to
have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is
apprehended or detained by the police or appears or
brought before a Board, such person shall,
notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other
law for the time being in force, be released on bail
with or without surety or placed under the
supervision of a probation officer or under the care
of any fit person:
Provided that such person shall not be so
released if there appears reasonable grounds for
believing that the release is likely to bring that
person into association with any known criminal or
expose the said person to moral, physical or
psychological danger or the person's release would
defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record
the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances
that led to such a decision.
(2) When such person having been apprehended is
not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the
officer-in-charge of the police station, such officer
shall cause the person to be kept only in an
observation home or a place of safety, as the case
may be in such manner as may be prescribed until
the person can be brought before a Board.
(3) When such person is not released on bail under
sub-section (1) by the Board, it shall make an order
sending him to an observation home or a place of
safety, as the case may be, for such period during
the pendency of the inquiry regarding the person, as
may be specified in the order.
(4) When a child in conflict with law is unable to fulfil
the conditions of bail order within seven days of the
bail order, such child shall be produced before the
Board for modification of the conditions of bail."
8. While implementing the provisions of the Act, 2015,
the Court shall be governed by the principle of best interest i.e.
all decisions regarding the child shall be based on the primary
consideration that they are in the interest of the child. The
object of the Act, 2015 is reformative and not further
degradation.
9. Having considered the submissions made at the bar
and in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of
the view that the present revision may be allowed.
10. Consequently, the present Criminal Revision is
allowed. The judgment dated 05.07.2023, passed by learned
Appellate Court and order dated 22.05.2023, passed by Board
are set aside.
11. Let the revisionist, who is detained in the
observation home, be released on bail after furnishing a
personal bond by his father/natural guardian with two reliable
sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Board
concerned subject to the condition that the father/natural
guardian of the revisionist shall furnish an undertaking that
upon release on bail, the revisionist will not be permitted to
come into contact with any known criminal.
__________________
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Dated 10.01.2024
Pant/
