X ( Minor ) v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3108 of 2021 Revisionist :- X ( Minor ) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Girja Shankar Prajapati,Raj Kumar Vaishya,Siddharth Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manvendra Singh Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. List revised. None appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 2 even in revised call. Record shows that Sri Manvendra Singh, Advocate filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of revisionist but his name has been shown for opposite party no. 2 wrongly. Certified copy of statement of victim filed today by learned counsel for the revisionist is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for revisionist, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act-2015 (hereinafter referred to as "J.J. Act, 2015) to allow the present revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 21.10.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Fatehpur in Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 2021 as well as order dated 23.6.2021 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Fatehpur. Further prayed to stay the operation of the aforesaid orders and to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 170 of 2020, under Section 376 IPC & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Husainganj, District Fatehpur. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the delinquent was juvenile aged about 17 years, 8 months and 12 days at the time of alleged offence. As per version in the F.I.R. rape was said to be committed by the revisionist with the victim who was aged about 14 years. During medical examination, no any injury internal or external was found on her person. In pathological report no any sperm was found to suggest that rape was committed with her. There is nothing on record to show that the revisionist committed rape with her. Further submitted that the statement of the victim has also been recorded before the learned trial court/POCSO Court as P.W. 1 on 8.2.2023 in which she has clearly stated that the revisionist has not committed rape with her but this case was got registered against him at the instance of her mother and brother, it also shows that he was implicated falsely in this case. It is also submitted that there is nothing on record to show the complicity of present delinquent. There is nothing adverse to the present delinquent in the report as submitted by the District Probation Officer. The provisions as contained under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as appellate court while rejecting the appeal which cannot be said to be in conformity with the law. The delinquent is in Juvenile Care Home since 15.9.2020 i.e. more than three years and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside the order passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision. Learned A.G.A. opposed the aforesaid prayer. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the period of delinquent remained in Juvenile Care Home, the provisions as contained u/s 12 Juvenile Justice Act and report submitted by the D.P.O. it appears that J.J. 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

23.6.2021 and the appellate court dated 21.10.2021 are, hereby, set aside and present Criminal Revision is hereby, allowed. It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail on executing personal bond by the revisionist (father 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/father 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 father will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.

(ii) The revisionist/father 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/father 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 :- 7.11.2023 A. Singh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad