HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 8480 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party alongwith learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act-2015 (hereinafter referred to as "J.J. Act,2015) to allow the present revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 10.11.2025 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, (POCSO Act) Court No. 3 Amroha in Criminal Appeal No. 139 of 2025 (Juvenile 'X' Vs. State of U.P. and another) as well as the impugned order dated 09.10.2025 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Amroha. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail arising out of Case Crime No. 183 of 2025, under Section 137(2), 351(2), 351(3), 64 B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Naugawan Sadat, District Amroha. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case revisionist is aged about 16 years. The victim was also aged about 16 years but during medical examination her age was found to be 18 years. He further submits that the contents of F.I.R. itself disclosed the fact that the victim herself went away from her house with the revisionist and F.I.R. was lodged after three days of the alleged incident. He further submits that the statement of victim as recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. before the learned Magistrate in which she stated that with the revisionist she went to Orissa in the house of his grandmother by train where physical relations were established which shows that both were consensuous and willy and no any force or violence was used against the victim. He also submits that she never made any hue and cry either in the way or in the house of his grandmother. It shows that she was consenting but under pressure of her parents she made statements about physical relations against her will before the learned Magistrate. Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Rajeev Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Santosh Kumar Singh, G.A. Juvenile X .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) It is further submitted that the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile Justice Board even the report submitted by Probation Officer was also not considered. The appellate court has also not considered all these facts but rejected the bail application without applying its judicial mind and considering the law as contained u/s 12 of the aforesaid Act. It is also submitted that the apprehension of possibility of involving the delinquent in company of other criminals has been mentioned in the order passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board and confirmed by the appellate court though no such possibility has been expressed by the Probation Officer in his report which is on record. The delinquent is in Juvenile Care Home since 04.06.2025 and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside order passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision. Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the victim was minor at the time of alleged incident and enticed away by the revisionist and went to Orrisa where physical relations against her will. In this way, he cannot be said to be innocent and has committed no offence. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the age of the revisionist, the period he remained in observation home, the statement of the victim as recorded before the learned Magistrate under Section 183 B.N.S.S., the provisions as contained u/s 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, the report submitted by the Probation Officer, it appears that Juvenile Justice Board as well as the Appellate Court had not considered the relevant provisions and the material on record in well manner but passed the order without applying their judicial mind. In this way, there appears ground in this revision and the orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as learned appellate court are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 09.10.2025 and the Appellate Court dated 10.11.2025 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed. It is directed that revisionist be released on bail on executing person bond by the revisionist (father of the delinquent) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on following conditions :- (i) The revisionist/father will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionist will not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical, or psychological danger and further that the father will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence. CRLR No. 8480 of 2025 2 (ii) The revisionist/father will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level which he would be encouraged to do besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits. (iii) Juvenile and the revisionist/father will report to the Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month. (iv) The Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on such a periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine. March 19, 2026 Suraj Srivastav CRLR No. 8480 of 2025 3 (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad