Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47119 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 652 of 2024 Revisionist :- Juvenile X Thru. His Father Y Of Case Crime No 18/2024 Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Rankaj Kumar Vishwakarma,Santosh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. As per Annexure No.CA-1 the service of notice is sufficient upon the opposite party No.2. However, when the case is taken up no one appeared to oppose the revision. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present. In these circumstances, this court proceeded to decide the case. 2. Heard Shri Santosh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist, Shri Badrul Hasan, learned A.G.A.-I 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 30.05.2024, passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Juvenile Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2024 (Juvenile 'X' through his father Ram Subhavan Vs. State of U.P. and another), which was preferred against the order dated 10.05.2024, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Ambedkar Nagar arising out of FIR /Case Crime No.0018/2024, under Section 377 I.P.C. and Section 5M/6 of the POCSO Act, Police Station - Kotwali Akbarpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar. 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 and the revisionist has been implicated in the case due to village party-bandi. 5. It is further stated that the revisionist, a juvenile, is in incarceration since 10.01.2024 and he is having no criminal history, which has not been opposed by the learned A.G.A., and thus, the period of incarceration would come to around 17 months and the punishment which could be awarded to a juvenile in terms of Section 18(1)(g) of the Act of 2015 is three years and as such, taking note of the period of incarceration, the juvenile is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. 6. Further submission of learned counsel for the revisionist is that according to the case of the prosecution as indicated in the F.I.R., according to which the F.I.R. was lodged under Section 377 I.P.C. against the revisionist, grievous injury was caused and there was a bleeding but the medical report indicates that the victim has not sustained injury. Accordingly, it is case of false implication. In these circumstances, the revisionist is 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. 7. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submitted that no illegality has been committed by both the courts below as there was ample evidence against the revisionist, but he has not disputed the above submissions of learned counsel for the revisionist. 8. Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case which includes period of incarceration and possibility of conclusion of trial in near future as also medical evidence, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. 9. The impugned judgment and order dated 30.05.2024, passed by the Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Juvenile Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2024 (Juvenile 'X' through his father Ram Subhavan Vs. State of U.P. and another), which was preferred against the order dated 10.05.2024, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Ambedkar Nagar arising out of FIR /Case Crime No.0018/2024, under Section 377 I.P.C. and Section 5M/6 of the POCSO Act, Police Station - Kotwali Akbarpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar are set aside. 10. Let Juvenile 'X' Through His father 'Y' involved in the 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. 11. 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. Order Date :- 12.8.2025 ML/- Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench