HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 581 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Shri Suresh Chandra Srivastava, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 by filing his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. This criminal revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short "Act of 2015") has been filed against the judgment and order dated 18.03.2025, passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sultanpur in Criminal Appeal No.09 of 2025 (X Minor Juvenile Delinquent Vs. Sate of U.P. and others), which was preferred against the order dated 31.01.2025, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Sultanpur in Bail Application (State of U.P. Vs. X Minor), arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.250 of 2024, under Section 70(2), 352, 351(3) BNS & Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Jaisinghpur, District- Sultanpur. 4. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist has been falsely implicated in the case, inasmuch as, the revisionist has not committed any offence as alleged and the prosecution story is false, concocted and misconceived. 5. It is further submitted that co-accused namely Shiv Kumar @ Nirahu Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Raj Narain Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Child In Conflict With Law Thru. His Father .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Nishad has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 09.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2985 of 2025. In these circumstances, the revisionist is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the revision is liable to be allowed. 6. Relevant portion of the order dated 09.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2985 of 2025 reads as under:- "1. Heard Shri Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ambrish Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.250 of 2024 under Sections 70(2), 351(3), 352 B.N.S. & 3/4 P.O.C.S.O. Act, 2012 registered at Police Station- Jaisinghpur, District- Sultanpur. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 08.09.2024 at about 22:23 hours against the applicant and Pawan Nishad stating that the accused persons had forcibly taken the informant's daughter to a field and both of them raped her. When she cried, the informant and his wife reached there. The police was also called by dialing no.112 and had taken away both the accused persons. 4. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., she stated that she used to talk to the applicant on phone and she categorically stated that nothing was done against her forcibly. 5. The medico-legal examination report mentions no mark of injury or sign of use of force. 6. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she reiterated her earlier version and she categorically stated that none of the accused persons had raped her and her father had lodged the F.I.R. on false allegations. 7. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and consistent statements of the victim, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the aforesaid crime. 8. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed." 7. It is further stated that the revisionist, a juvenile, is languishing in jail since 13.09.2024, i.e. about one year, which has not been opposed by the side opposite, and as per Section 18(1)(g) of the Act of 2015 (subject to other provisions of the Act including Section 21 of the Act 2015), the maximum punishment which could be awarded to a juvenile is three years and as such, taking note of the period of incarceration, the juvenile is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In these circumstances, the revisionist is also entitled to be enlarged on bail and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may come with the contact of the known and unknown bet criminals or may be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger. 8. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA, on the other hand, submitted that no illegality has been committed by both the CRLR No. 581 of 2025 2 courts below as there was ample evidence against the revisionist, but he has not disputed the above submissions of learned counsel for the revisionist. 9. Thus having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case, including the fact that co-accused Shiv Kumar @ Nirahu Nishad has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 09.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2985 of 2025 as also the period of incarceration, i.e. about one year, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. 10. The impugned judgment and order dated 18.03.2025, passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sultanpur in Criminal Appeal No.09 of 2025 (X Minor Juvenile Delinquent Vs. Sate of U.P. and others), which was preferred against the order dated 31.01.2025, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Sultanpur in Bail Application (State of U.P. Vs. X Minor), arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.250 of 2024, under Section 70(2), 352, 351(3) BNS & Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Jaisinghpur, District- Sultanpur are set aside. 11. Let Juvenile 'X', of aforesaid Case Crime Number be enlarged on bail, in the above mentioned case on executing a personal bond by his father/natural guardian with two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court/Board concerned and on submission of undertaking on affidavit by his father that he will take due care of the juvenile, will not allow him to indulge in any unlawful or criminal activity or join the company of unlawful elements, will keep him under strict control, shall not attempt or tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses, shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence, shall remain present before the trial Court on each date fixed either personally or through his counsel, failing which, the order of bail granted to Juvenile may be cancelled. 12. For a period of one year from today, the Juvenile shall appear before the District Probation Officer concerned along with his natural guardian on 10th of every month. August 27, 2025 Anand/- CRLR No. 581 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench