X Minor Juvenile Delinquent v. Sate of U.P. and others), which was preferred against the order dated

2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

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 15.03.2024, passed by the Juvenile Court/Special Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in Criminal Appeal No.08 of 2024 (X Minor Juvenile Delinquent Vs. Sate of U.P. and others), which was preferred against the order dated 05.07.2023, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kheri in Bail Application (State of U.P. Vs. X Minor), arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.719/2022, under Sections 302, 201, 376-DA/34 I.P.C. & Section 5G/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali Sadar, District- Kheri.

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 co-accused, who are also juvenile, and one Deepu have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 11.12.2023, 02.02.2024 and 06.11.2023, passed in Criminal Revision Nos.115 of 2023, 186 of 2023, 187 of 2023 and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.2083 of 2023 respectively. In these circumstances, the revisionist is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the revision is liable to be allowed.

6. Relevant portion of the order dated 02.02.2024 passed in Criminal Revision No.91 of 2024 reads as under:- "1. Heard Sri Aditya Singh Tomar holding brief of Sri Shailesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the revisionist, and Ms Charu Singh, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

2. By means of the instant revision filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, the revisionist has challenged the validity of the order dated 06.06.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Lakhimpur Kheri rejecting his application for release on bail and the order dated 23.11.2023 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Lakhimpur Kheri dismissing the Criminal Appeal filed by the revisionist against the order rejecting his bail application.

3. The FIR was lodged on 28.06.2022 against unknown persons. The applicant was implicated subsequently on the basis of statements of the witnesses along with four other persons. Three co- accused persons have already been granted bail.

4. Social Enquiry Report mentions atmosphere in the revisionist's home is congenial. No bad habit of the applicant has been reported by the District Probation Officer.

5. Keeping in view the aforesaid recommendations of the District Probationary Officer, I am of the view that the revision deserves to be allowed.

6. Accordingly, this revision stands allowed. The order dated 06.06.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Lakhimpur Kheri rejecting his application for release on bail and the order dated 23.11.2023 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Lakhimpur Kheri dismissing the Criminal Appeal are set aside."

7. It is further submitted that the revisionist, a juvenile, is languishing in jail since 29.06.2022, i.e. about three years and two months 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 (subject to Section 21 of the Act 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. In these circumstances, the revisionist is also entitled to be enlarged 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.

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, including the fact that co-accused, who are also juvenile, as also co-accused Deepu have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 11.12.2023, 02.02.2024 and 06.11.2023, passed in Criminal Revision Nos.115 of 2023, 186 of 2023, 187 of 2023 and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.2083 of 2023 respectively, as also the period of incarceration, i.e. about three years and two months, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed.

10. The impugned judgment and order dated 15.03.2024, passed by the Juvenile Court/Special Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in Criminal Appeal No.08 of 2024 (X Minor Juvenile Delinquent Vs. Sate of U.P. and others), which was preferred against the order dated 05.07.2023, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kheri in Bail Application (State of U.P. Vs. X Minor), arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.719/2022, under Sections 302, 201, 376-DA/34 I.P.C. & Section 5G/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali Sadar, District- Kheri are 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. 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 :- 21.8.2025 Anand/- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

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 15.03.2024, passed by the Juvenile Court/Special Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in Criminal Appeal No.08 of 2024 (X Minor Juvenile Delinquent Vs. Sate of U.P. and others), which was preferred against the order dated 05.07.2023, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kheri in Bail Application (State of U.P. Vs. X Minor), arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.719/2022, under Sections 302, 201, 376-DA/34 I.P.C. & Section 5G/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali Sadar, District- Kheri.

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 co-accused, who are also juvenile, and one Deepu have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 11.12.2023, 02.02.2024 and 06.11.2023, passed in Criminal Revision Nos.115 of 2023, 186 of 2023, 187 of 2023 and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.2083 of 2023 respectively. In these circumstances, the revisionist is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the revision is liable to be allowed.

6. Relevant portion of the order dated 02.02.2024 passed in Criminal Revision No.91 of 2024 reads as under:- "1. Heard Sri Aditya Singh Tomar holding brief of Sri Shailesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the revisionist, and Ms Charu Singh, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

2. By means of the instant revision filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, the revisionist has challenged the validity of the order dated 06.06.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Lakhimpur Kheri rejecting his application for release on bail and the order dated 23.11.2023 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Lakhimpur Kheri dismissing the Criminal Appeal filed by the revisionist against the order rejecting his bail application.

3. The FIR was lodged on 28.06.2022 against unknown persons. The applicant was implicated subsequently on the basis of statements of the witnesses along with four other persons. Three co- accused persons have already been granted bail.

4. Social Enquiry Report mentions atmosphere in the revisionist's home is congenial. No bad habit of the applicant has been reported by the District Probation Officer.

5. Keeping in view the aforesaid recommendations of the District Probationary Officer, I am of the view that the revision deserves to be allowed.

6. Accordingly, this revision stands allowed. The order dated 06.06.2023 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Lakhimpur Kheri rejecting his application for release on bail and the order dated 23.11.2023 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Lakhimpur Kheri dismissing the Criminal Appeal are set aside."

7. It is further submitted that the revisionist, a juvenile, is languishing in jail since 29.06.2022, i.e. about three years and two months 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 (subject to Section 21 of the Act 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. In these circumstances, the revisionist is also entitled to be enlarged 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.

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, including the fact that co-accused, who are also juvenile, as also co-accused Deepu have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 11.12.2023, 02.02.2024 and 06.11.2023, passed in Criminal Revision Nos.115 of 2023, 186 of 2023, 187 of 2023 and Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.2083 of 2023 respectively, as also the period of incarceration, i.e. about three years and two months, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed.

10. The impugned judgment and order dated 15.03.2024, passed by the Juvenile Court/Special Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri in Criminal Appeal No.08 of 2024 (X Minor Juvenile Delinquent Vs. Sate of U.P. and others), which was preferred against the order dated 05.07.2023, passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kheri in Bail Application (State of U.P. Vs. X Minor), arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.719/2022, under Sections 302, 201, 376-DA/34 I.P.C. & Section 5G/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali Sadar, District- Kheri are 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. 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 :- 21.8.2025 Anand/- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench