HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 660 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the private opposite party Nos. 2 despite service of notice, as appears from Annexure No. CA-1 to the counter affidavit of State dated 30.07.2025, However, learned A.G.A is present in the Court. 2. In these circumstances and also taking note of the order of this Court dated 03.09.2025, which says "It is made clear that the case would not be adjourned on the next date on account of absence of opposite party no. 2 and the same would be heard on merits as the issue relates to enlargement of revisionist on bail." 3. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. 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 01.05.2025, passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 05 of 2025, as well as against the order dated 21.03.2025, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 22 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 0253 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 87, 70(1) of B.N.S, 2023, Police Station- Baskhari, District- Ambedkar Nagar. 5. 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. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Bhup Chandra Singh, Abdul Raheem Khan, Banwari Lal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Jagroopan Nishad Juvenile Of Fir No. 0253/2024 Thru. His Cousin Uncle .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 6. It is further stated that if the story of prosecution is taken on its face value even in that eventuality, taking note of spirit of Section 12, Section 18(1)(g) of the Act of 2015 and also the period of incarceration of i.e. since 05.09.2024, revisionist aged about 15 years and 4 months and also the punishment which could be awarded to a juvenile under Section 18(1)(g) of the Act of 2015 read with other provisions including Section 21 of the Act of 2015, the revisionist is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Gravity of the offence has not been mentioned as a ground to reject the bail. It is not a relevant factor while considering to grant bail to the juvenile. It has been so held by this Court in Shiv Kumar alias Sadhu Vs. State of U.P. 2010 (68) ACC 616(LB). It has been consistently followed in subsequent decisions of this court. 8. It is also stated that vide orders dated 26.05.2025 and 08.05.2025, this Court allowed the Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No 523 of 2025 filed by co-accused Md. Asgar and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3996 of 2025 filed by co-accused Ahad Alam respectively and enlarged the co- accused persons on bail. 9. Taking note of aforesaid aspect of the case, the revisionist is entitled to be enlarged on bail and in case he is enlarged on bail, 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. 10. 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. 11. Thus having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case, including that co-accused namely Md. Asgar and Ahad Alam have already been released on bail by this Court as also the period of incarceration i.e. about one year, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed . 12. The judgment and order dated 01.05.2025, passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 05 of 2025, as well as against the order dated 21.03.2025, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 22 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 0253 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 87, 70(1) of B.N.S, 2023, Police Station- Baskhari, District- Ambedkar Nagar are hereby set aside. CRLR No. 660 of 2025 2 13. Let Juvenile Of Fir No. 0253/2024 of aforesaid Case Crime Number be enlarged on bail, in the above mentioned case on executing a personal bond by his 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 natural guardian 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 her counsel, failing which, the order of bail granted to Juvenile may be cancelled. 14. 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. September 22, 2025 DiVYa CRLR No. 660 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench