Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 158484 (ALL)

JUVENILE A , THRU. HIS ELDER BROTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME , LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

CRLR/1134/2024 · 2025-08-20

Saurabh Lavania

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48869 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1134 of 2024 Revisionist :- Juvenile A , Thru. His Elder Brother Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home , Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Vijay Kishor Mishra,P.K. Singh Bisen Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of State in the Court today is taken on record. 2. Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the opposite party No. 2/complainant despite service of notice, as appears from Annexure No. CA-1 to the counter affidavit of State. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In these circumstances, the Court proceeded to hear the instant bail revision on merits. 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 07.08.2024, passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act, Pratapgarh in Criminal Appeal No. 96 of 2023 (Juvenile X Versus State of U.P.), which was preferred against the order dated 23.09.2022, passed by the Juvenile Court, Pratapgarh in Case Crime No.88/2022, under Sections 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Hathigawan, District-Pratapgarh. 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. It is further stated that the revisionist, a juvenile, is languishing in jail since 20.05.2022 and he is having no criminal history, which has not been opposed by the side opposite, and as per Section 18(1)(g) of the Act of 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. 7. It is further stated that in these circumstances, 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. 8. Learned AGA, 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. 9. Thus having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. 10. The impugned judgment and order dated 07.08.2024, passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act, Pratapgarh in Criminal Appeal No. 96 of 2023 (Juvenile X Versus State of U.P.) and the order dated 23.09.2022, passed by the Juvenile Court, Pratapgarh in Case Crime No.88/2022, under Sections 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Hathigawan, District- Pratapgarh, are hereby 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. 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. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Jyoti/- Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench