Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47450 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 706 of 2025 Revisionist :- Juvenile Delinquent A (Minor )Thru. His Father Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Rahul Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. As per office report dated 28.07.2025, notice upon the opposite party No.2 has been served. However, when the case is taken up, no one appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.2. However, learned A.G.A. for the State is present. In these circumstances, the court proceeded to decide the matter finally. 3. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. This criminal revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short "Act of 2015") read with Section 397/401 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment and order dated 04.06.2025, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Juvenile Criminal Appeal No.09 of 2025 (Sakir @ Ataurrahman Vs. State of U.P. and another), which was preferred against the order dated 22.05.2025, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No.86/2025, arising out of FIR /Case Crime No.0042/2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act and Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station - Jaitpur, 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. 6. Learned counsel for the revisionist has further submitted that even if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value then in that eventuality, possibility of conviction of revisionist is bleak in view of law settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment(s) rendered in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana, (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2021) 7 SCC; Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110 and Amol Bhagwan Nehul vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1230. 7. Learned counsel for the revisionist next submitted that a perusal of the statement of the victim, who as per medical opinion is aged about 16-17 years, would indicate that the victim on her own volition accompanied the revisionist, aged about 18 years. In this view of the matter, the benefit of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S. Varadarajan Vs. State of Madras, 1964 SCC OnLine SC 36 could be extended to the revisionist by the trial court. 8. It is also submitted that as per medico legal examination report of the victim, annexed as Annexure No.6 to the present revision, particularly paragraph 18 of the same, indicates that hymen was intact. In these circumstances, the revisionist who has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 06.03.2025, is entitled to be released 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. 9. 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. 10. Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case including the statement of victim as also medical opinion, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. 11. The impugned judgment and order dated 04.06.2025, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Juvenile Criminal Appeal No.09 of 2025 (Sakir @ Ataurrahman Vs. State of U.P. and another), which was preferred against the order dated 22.05.2025, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No.86/2025, arising out of FIR /Case Crime No.0042/2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act and Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station - Jaitpur, District - Ambedkar Nagar are set aside. 12. Let Juvenile Delinquent 'A' (Minor) of 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. 13. 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 :- 13.8.2025 ML/- Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench