Abc (Juvenile) v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. -80 Case :-CRIMINAL REVISION No. -4097 of 2023 Revisionist :-Abc (Juvenile) Opposite Party :-State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :-Satya Dheer Singh Jadaun Counsel for Opposite Party :-G.A.,Bali Ram Pandey,Brij Gopal Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his natural guardian with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 15.07.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No. 95 of 2023 as well as order dated 01.05.2023 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Prayagraj. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 270 of 2022 under Section 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kaundhiyara, District Prayagraj (Allahabad). It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case the delinquent was aged about 16 at the time of alleged incident. It is further submitted that the victim was also aged about 17 and a half years at the time of alleged incident. As per allegation in F.I.R. molestation was made by the revisionist with the victim and incident was seen by the brother consequently present F.I.R. was lodged under Section 354 I.P.C. and 7/8 of POCSO Act. During the course of investigation improvement in the statement of the victim was made and charge under Section 376 I.P.C. was also added. No any injury was found on the person of the victim to suggest that rape was committed with her and also there is no explanation of lodging the F.I.R. after delay of 24 hours. The incident was said to be seen by the brother of the victim but no fact of rape was disclosed by him in the Tehreer and on the basis of which F.I.R. was lodged. It is also submitted that there is contradiction in her statements as recorded by I.O. and also by the learned Magistrate. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O. It is further submitted that the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile Justice Board even the report submitted by Probation Officer was also not considered. The appellate court has also not considered all these facts but rejected the appeal without applying its judicial mind and considering the law as contained u/s 12 of the aforesaid Act. He is in Child Care Home since 15.03.2023 i.e. about ten months and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision. Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case rape was committed by the revisionist with the victim but police did not lodge the F.I.R. in real sense but minimized the case. Later on, Section 376 I.P.C. was added during the course of investigation. In this regard, the orders passed by the learned J.J. Board as well as learned appellate court cannot be said to be unlawful, therefore, he cannot be said to be entitled for bail and revision, being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, perusal of record, the provisions as contained u/s 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, the report submitted by the Probation Officer, it appears that Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court had not considered the relevant provisions and the material on record in well manner but passed the orders without applying their judicial mind. In this way, there appears ground in this revision and the orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as learned appellate court are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 01.05.2023 and the appellate court dated 15.07.2023 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed. It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail on executing person bond by the revisionist ( natural guardian of the delinquent) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on following conditions :-

(i) The revisionist/ natural guardian will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionist 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 the natural guardian will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

(ii) The revisionist/ 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 besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits.

(iii) Juvenile and the revisionist/ natural guardian will report to the Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month.

(iv) The Probation Officer will keep a 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 on such a periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine. Order Date :- 2.11.2023/ Suraj Srivastav High Court of Judicature at Allahabad