HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1237 of 2024 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant. 2. With the consent of the parties, the revision which relates to enlargement of bail is being finally decided. 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 25.09.2024, passed by the Appellate Court, Sultanpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2024, which was preferred against the order dated 02.09.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Sultanpur, arising out of Case Crime 36 of 2024, under Sections 363, 302, 201 IPC, Police Station- Ram Ganj, District-Amethi. 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 stated that the revisionist, a juvenile has been languishing in jail since 20.04.2024. He has no criminal Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Suresh Chandra Srivastava, Vaibhav Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ramakar Shukla Juvenile, Delinquent X Thru. His Natural Guardian .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) history, which fact has not been opposed by the opposite side. 6. It is also submitted that as per Section 18(1)(g) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the maximum punishment that can be awarded to a juvenile is three years which is however subject to the other provisions of the Act of 2015 including Section 21. Therefore, considering the period of incarceration already undergone, the juvenile is entitled to be released on bail. 7. It is stated that the appellant was not named in the FIR and there is no witness of last scene as also that the basis of the pending criminal case i.e. the FIR was lodged against unknown person. 8. It is further submitted that the revisionist has been implicated by the prosecution on the basis of suspicion raised by mother of the deceased. 9. It is further stated that recovery of the body shown by the prosecution on pointing out of the revisionist is a fake one, as there is no public witness to the said recovery memo. 10. 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. 11. Learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant 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. 12. Thus having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case, including that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no witness of last seen and also that there is no public witness of the recovery of body as also the period of incarceration, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. 13. The judgment and order dated 25.09.2024, passed by the Appellate Court, Sultanpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2024, which was preferred against the order dated 02.09.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Sultanpur, arising out of Case Crime 36 of 2024, under Sections 363, 302, 201 IPC, CRLR No. 1237 of 2024 2 Police Station- Ram Ganj, District- Amethi, are hereby set aside. 14. Let Juvenile, Delinquent X Thru. His Natural Guardian of aforesaid Case Crime Number be enlarged on bail, in the above mentioned case on executing a personal bond by his brother/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. 15. 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 10, 2025 Mohit Singh/- CRLR No. 1237 of 2024 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench