Uttarakhand High Court
CRLR/603/2025 on 15 September, 2025
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL. Dat
or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No. e
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
CRLR No. 603 of 2025
Hon'ble Ashish Naithani, J.
Mr. Harshpal Sekhon, learned counsel for the Revisionist.
2. Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State of
Uttarakhand.
3. The present Revision has been filed by the natural
guardian, father of the Revisionist, namely Tajpal Singh, as the
Revisionist has been in judicial custody since 18.04.2025, with the
following prayer:
(a) To allow the present Criminal Revision and set aside the
judgment and order dated 01.08.2025, passed by the Court
of learned Juvenile Court/F.T.C./Additional Sessions
Judge/Special Judge (POCSO), Rudrapur, District Udham
Singh Nagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 178 of 2025, "A vs.
State of Uttarakhand", whereby the criminal appeal of the
Revisionist was dismissed, and consequently, his bail
application was rejected, in connection with F.I.R. No. 124
of 2025 dated 18.04.2025, registered under Sections
103(1) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, at
Police Station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar; and to
enlarge the Revisionist on bail, in the interest of justice.
4. Learned counsel for the Revisionist submits that the
Revisionist, who is still in judicial custody, was 17 years of age at
the time of the incident. It is alleged that the juvenile killed his
paternal aunt (Chachi) with a stone weapon (pathal) and also
inflicted injuries on his mother and brother when they tried to
intervene.
5. It is further submitted that the Revisionist is mentally
unstable and that ordinarily, such a gruesome act could not have
been committed by a person of sound mind. Despite this, the
learned Trial Court rejected the bail application, which according
to the Revisionist, ought to have been allowed.
6. Learned counsel for the State, however, opposed the
submissions, contending that the Trial Court had duly considered
the report of the District Probation Officer/Social Welfare Officer,
which clearly records that releasing the juvenile on bail may
endanger society and pose a threat to others. Accordingly, it was
urged that the rejection of bail was justified and the Revisionist
ought not to be enlarged on bail.
7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, and upon
consideration, this Court is of the opinion that before taking a
final decision in the present revision concerning the bail of the
juvenile, it would be appropriate that the Revisionist be medically
examined. Accordingly, it is directed that the Revisionist shall be
examined by a panel of doctors to be constituted by the Chief
Medical Officer of the concerned district where the Revisionist is
presently lodged in judicial custody. The panel shall include a
psychiatrist and such other specialists as may be required to
assess the mental health of the juvenile.
8. Let this matter be listed on 27.10.2025 for further hearing
along with the report of the medical examination.
(Ashish Naithani, J.)
15.09.2025
Shiksha
