Allahabad High Court
Juvenile Delinquent X Thru. His Father Y vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 2 August, 2024
Author: Abdul Moin
Bench: Abdul Moin
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:53189 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 776 of 2024 Revisionist :- Juvenile Delinquent X Thru. His Father Y Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Dileep Kumar Tiwari,Md.Khurshed Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dinesh Kumar Ojha Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of opposite party No.1, 3 & 4 and Shri Dinesh Kumar OJha, learned counsel appearing for opposite party No.2.
2. The instant criminal revision has been filed u/s 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 read with Section 438/442 BNSS, 2023 against the judgment and order dated 28.06.2024 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge / Special Judge POCSO Act, Court No.12, Sultanpur in Criminal Appeal No.31 of 2024 as well as the judgment and order dated 30.04.2024 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Sultanpur / Amethi in Criminal Case No.111 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 323 I.P.C. & Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Gauriganj, District Amethi.
3. The contention of learned counsel for the revisionist is that the revisionist is a juvenile. An F.I.R. was lodged on 17.01.2024, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the revision, under the provisions of Section 363 & 366 I.P.C. by Shri Ramavadh against the juvenile / revisionist contending that the juvenile had taken away his daughter aged about 16 years. Subsequently he returned back and left his daughter at his home and again ran away.
4. Learned counsel for the revisionist contends that in the statement of the father of the victim, a copy of which is filed as annexure 2 to the revision, it emerges that the only offence which the juvenile is said to have committed is of having beaten the victim and not having kept her well.
5. It is also contended that in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 & 164 of Cr.P.C., she contended that she had gone with the juvenile on he instigating her.
6. Reliance has also been placed on the report of District Probationary Officer dated 18.04.2024, a copy of which has been filed as annexure 9 to the revision, to contend that the said report has been concluded with the observation that the entire dispute is on account of the love affair and that there is possibility of the juvenile getting reformed if he is given proper care.
7. The contention is that these aspects of the matter have not been considered by the Juvenile Board while rejecting the bail application of the juvenile vide order dated 30.04.2024 and again by the appellate court, in the appeal of the juvenile filed against the order dated 30.04.2024, vide judgment and order dated 28.06.2024 and hence, the instant revision.
8. On the other hand, the learned A.G.A. as well as Shri Ojha, have strongly opposed the revision filed on behalf of the revisionist.
9. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record, it emerges that an F.I.R. had been lodged against the juvenile by the father of the victim on 17.01.2024. From the statement of the father of the victim, it emerges that only thing which has been indicated in the statement is of the juvenile having not kept the victim properly and having beaten her. The report of the D.P.O. indicates that the entire episode is on account of love affair and that the juvenile has to be dealt with proper care.
10. However, this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the juvenile board while rejecting the bail application of the revisionist and in turn again by the appellate court by rejecting the appeal of the revisionist filed against the bail rejection order.
11. From a perusal of the averments made in the F.I.R. vis-a-vis the statement of the father of the victim and the victim herself as well as the report of the D.P.O., it is apparent that the learned court as well as the learned appellate court have wrongly proceeded with the bail application of the revisionist and have rejected the same without proper application of mind.
12. Keeping in view of the aforesaid, the revision is allowed. The judgment and order dated 28.06.2024 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge / Special Judge POCSO Act, Court No.12, Sultanpur in Criminal Appeal No.31 of 2024 as well as the judgment and order dated 30.04.2024 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Sultanpur / Amethi in Criminal Case No.111 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 323 I.P.C. & Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Gauriganj, District Amethi are set aside.
13. Let the revisionist-Juvenile be released on bail in Case Crime No. 10 of 2024, u/s 363, 366-A, 376, 323 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Gauriganj, District Amethi upon his guardian furnishing a personal bond with two solvent sureties of his relatives, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(i) the natural guardian will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the juvenile will not be permitted to come into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical or psychological danger and further that the guardian will ensure that the juvenile will not indulge in any criminal activity;
(ii) natural guardian will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level which he would be encouraged to do.
(iii) juvenile accompanied by his natural guardian, will report to the Probation Officer on the first working day of every calendar month. The D.P.O. shall maintain a diary recording their attendance.
(iv) The District Probation Officer will keep strict vigil on the activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board concerned.
14. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court/J.J.Board shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led, uninfluenced by any finding or observation whatsoever in this order.
Order Date :- 2.8.2024 S. Shivhare