Allahabad High Court
Munna @ Salauddin Ansari (Minor) vs State Of U.P. And Another on 12 October, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 ALL 2179
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 849 of 2020 Revisionist :- Munna @ Salauddin Ansari (Minor) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Himanshu Srivastava,Siddhartha Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anil Kumar-IX,J.
The instant criminal revision under Section 102 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (herein-in-after referred to as 'Act') is directed against the order dated 06.02.2020 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Criminal Appeal No. 04/2020 (Munna @ Salauddin Ansari Vs. State of U.P. and another) by which appeal of the revisionist was dismissed and order dated 08.01.2020 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Case Crime No. 325/2019 under Section 5 of Explosive Substances Act and Sections 147, 295 and 120-B I.PC. and Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, Police Station- Turkpatti, District Kushinagar by which prayer for release of the revisionist on bail was rejected.
Heard learned counsel for revisionist and learned A.G.A. for State.
As per F.I.R. of the case which was registered on 12.11.2019 as Case Crime No. 325/2019 against the revisionist and six others under Section 5 Explosive Substance Act, Sections 147, 295, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act. Since the revisionist claimed juvenility, after holding preliminary assessment, the Juvenile Justice Board has declared the revisionist as juvenile and it was held that at the time of incident his age was 14 years 10 month and 10 days.
After being declared juvenile, revisionist filed an application for bail through his mother/guardian before Juvenile Justice Board which was rejected vide order dated 08.01.2020 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Kushinagar.
Against the order dated 08.01.2020 passed by The Juvenile Justice Board rejecting the application to release on bail, appeal was filed which was rejected by order dated 06.02.2020 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Kushinagar at Padrauna.
Against the impugned order dated 08.01.2020 passed by Juvenile Justice Board and order dated 06.02.2020 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kushinagar at Padrauna this revision has been filed by the revisionist on the ground that revisionist is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Impugned orders are against law and not passed keeping in view the spirit of law that has been laid down with regard to juvenile in conflict with law. The reasonings of the impugned orders are superficial, not convincing and not supported by any evidence.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of release of the revisionist on bail and submitted that learned Juvenile Justice Board and learned appellate court has rightly rejected the prayer to release him on bail considering the facts and circumstances of the case and provision of Section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for parties along with entire matter available on record.
Bail of juvenile in conflicting with law has to be considered on parameters in Section 12 of Juvenile Justice Act. Section 12(1) and (2) of Juvenile Justice Act 2015 regarding bail of juvenile provides:-
"(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 in such manner as may be prescribed until the person can be brought before a Board."
Contention raised on behalf of revisionist has been confined to the extent that the revisionist is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The revisionist has already been declared juvenile by the court of Juvenile Justice Board and his age has been determined below 16 years. There is no evidence on record that may indicate that the release of revisionist is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. Even Probation Officer has not reported any criminal history of the revisionist or his family members. There is no basis supported with evidence for reaching on such conclusion that in the event of his release on bail there is possibility of his going into company of known criminal or his release would defeat the end of justice.
It is also submitted that co-accused of this case namely Ashafaq Aalam @ Dr. Captain Ashafaq Aalam, Malauna Ajimuddin, and Hazi Kutubuddin have already enlarged on bail vide orders dated 04.02.2020, 05.03.2020, 20.04.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 1878/2020, 10722/2020, 7779/2020 copies of which have been produced for perusal. Revisionist is languishing in jail since 15.11.2019.
On the basis of above discussion this Court is of the view that board was not justified in rejecting the bail application and also appellate court did not consider the provision of Section 12 of the Act in right perspective, both the orders are not sustainable and liable to be set aside.
In the result, this criminal revision succeeds and the impugned orders dated 08.01.2020 & 06.02.2020 are hereby set aside and reversed. Bail application of the revisionist stands allowed.
Let the revisionist Munna @ Salauddin Ansari be released on bail in aforesaid case upon his mother/guardian furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Juvenile Justice Board, Kushinagar Padrauna subject to the following conditions:-
(1) The guardian/mother will furnish an undertaking that on release of the revisionist on bail juvenile will not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical or psychological danger and further that his mother/guardian will ensure that juvenile will not repeat the offence.
(2) The revisionist through guardian shall file an undertaking to the fact that he shall remain present before the trial court on each fixed date.
Order Date :- 12.10.2020 Sharad/-