Reserved On :- 01.09.2025 Delivered On :- 24.09.2025 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3391 of 2025 Court No. - 47 HON'BLE SIDDHARTH, J. 1. Despite service of notice on respondent nos. 3 and 4 but no one has put in appearance to oppose this revision. 2. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material on record. 3. The present criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 17.05.2025 passed by the court of Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (POCSO Act) Jalaun in Criminal Appeal No. 34 of 2022, Ajay @ Buddhan vs. State of U.P. arising out of the judgment and order dated 25.05.2022 passed by the Court of Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jalaun in Case No. 11 of 2014, State of U.P. vs. Buddhan @ Ajay pertaining to Case Crime No. 276 of 2013, under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Gohan, District- Jalaun. 4. The prosecution case is that on 07.05.2013 at about 12 p.m the minor daughter of informant aged about 6 years, was playing near the government tap in the neighbourhood. The revisionist, who is resident of the same locality, enticed her to ditch near the agricultural field of kathole and committed the offence of rape against her. She came running with blood on her private part to her house and informed her mother about the incident. When his wife went to the place of incident, the revisionist seeing them ran away. 5. On the basis of the application given at police station in Case Crime No. 276 of 2013, under Section- 376 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act was registered and subsequently charge sheet was accordingly submitted before Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Sushil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Juvenile X .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) the court. 6. The Children's Court declared the revisionist as juvenile by the order dated 22.08.2014. The statement of revisionist was recorded under Section 251 Cr.P.C wherein he alleged false implication and claimed innocence. Before the Juvenile Justice Board the informant and father of victim was examined as P.W.-1; Shanti Devi, mother of victim was examined as P.W.- 2; Smt. Pallavi Agarwal (Pathologist), was examined as P.W.-3 and Constable, Nirankar Swaroop, was examined as P.W.-4; Rati Pal Verma (Retired Sub-Inspector), was examined as P.W.-5 and the child victim was examined before the trial court as P.W.-6. 7. Before the trial court the statement of all the witnesses were recorded who proved the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt. The child victim P.W.-6 also proved the allegations made against the revisionist. The trial court found the offence alleged against the revisionist as proved and directed that he shall be sent to District Jail, Orai to undergo three years imprisonment each under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. He shall also liable to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each under both the aforesaid penal sections and in case of default he shall undergo one month's further imprisonment and 75 percent of fine shall be paid to the victim. On appeal before the Children's Court the judgment of the trial court was upheld and hence this revision. 8. After going through the evidence on trial court record and considering the statements of the revisionist and the learned A.G.A., this court finds that the judgments and order impugned in this revision do not suffer from any illegality. The allegations against the applicant are regarding commission of heinous offence against a minor girl aged about 6 years only. The medical report of child victim is duly proved by the medical evidence and the statement of P.W.-3. Hence, the order of conviction passed by both the courts below is hereby confirmed. 9. However considering the fact that the revisionist was enlarged on bail by this court by the order dated 24.07.2025 only, after he had undergone actual custody of 21 months, the remaining period of sentence of revisionist is converted into fine of Rs. 25,000/- each under Section 376 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. He shall be released from jail after deposit of the aforesaid fine only. In case of default, the revisionist shall undergo six months of additional rigorous imprisonment each under both the sections. An amount of Rs. 45,000/- shall be paid to the victim while amount of Rs. 5,000/- shall go to the State. 10. The criminal revision is partly allowed. CRLR No. 3391 of 2025 2 11. Let the lower court record be returned back to the trial court within a week. September 24, 2025 Rohit CRLR No. 3391 of 2025 3 (Siddharth,J.) Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad