State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another vs Counsel for Revisionist(s)

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Ms. Rani Singh brief holder for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The instant criminal revision under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act has been filed against the judgement and order dated

18.07.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, (Exclusive-I)/ Justice Juvenile Court, Raebareli in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2023 as well as the order dated 05.06.2024 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Raebareli in Case Crime No. 159 of 2024 under Sections 364,302,201,34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar District Raebareli.

3. By the impugned order learned Juvenile Justice Board had rejected the bail application of the revisionist, who has been declared Juvenile in conflict of law vide order dated 05.06.2024.

4. Feeling aggrieved by rejection of bail, Juvenile appeal was preferred before the Special Judge, POCSO Act (Exclusive-I)/ Justice Juvenile Court, Raebareli bearing Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2024 under Section 101 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act, which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated

18.07.2024. It is also stated in the impugned order that cause of death is Asphyxia due to strangulation associated with Coma. The offence is premeditated . The juvenile is co-accused had conspire and kill the deceased in furtherance of conspiracy and concealed the dead body .

5. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is not named in the FIR . The name of the revisionist was surfaced in the confessional statement of co- accused/ Robin dated 16.03.2024 wherein he has stated that he was in love with a girl whose marriage was fixed with the deceased. He became infuriated after knowing this fact and he conspired to kill Ravi Shanker son of Jagdish Singh with the assistance of his friends Lov Kush Tiwari, Rishi Rajpoot and Ashu Singh. Rishi Rajput caught legs 2 CRLR No. 878 of 2024 of the deceased, Lov Kush Tiwari caught his hand and Ashu Sigh and Robin Singh strangulated him till death by rope around his neck due to which he died. The dead body was thrown in the water of river bank.

6. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that even if reliance has been placed on the alleged confessional statement, the only role assigned to the revisionist is catching hand of the deceased at the time of incident. He has not been attributed role of killing the deceased in the incident and he has been falsely implicated of this case. There is no valid evidence against the revisionist regarding the complicity in the offence. He is in custody of observation home since 21.03.2024 and no credible evidence has been collected against the revisionist during investigation. The dead body of the deceased was recovered on the pointing out of co-accused Robin Singh.

7. He further submitted that juvenile Rishi Rajput and one of the main accused Ashu Singh have already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the revisionist stands better footing than that of accused persons to enlarge on bail.

8. He also submitted that it is stated in the impugned order dated 05.06.2024 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, the District Probation Office has stated in its report dated

03.05.2024 that juvenile has not been granted proper protection. A criminal act attributed to the juvenile appears to be result of inappropriate family atmosphere and wrong association. but it is stated in the report that his reformation is probable in reformatory atmosphere . His the father is agriculturist and the mother is home maker. His father is guardian . A certificate of Gram Pradhan of the village has also filed wherein it has been stated that the juveile is presently studying in Class XII . He may be associated with some skill development programme for improvement. He lastly submitted that there is nothing in the report of District Probation Officer in case of the grant of bail to juvenile, he may be exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger or he may be associated with known criminal due to which his enlargement on bail, the ends of justice will defeat .

9. Per contra, learned brief holder for the State has opposed the bail of the juvenile and submits that the offence is of serious in nature and in the report of District Probation Officer his surrounding atmosphere has not been found congenial.

10. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the revision, impugned orders, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents.

11. Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case, including that co-accused namely Ashu Singh having similar role has already been granted bail by this Court as also the period of incarceration i.e. about eighteen months, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. 3 CRLR No. 878 of 2024

12. The impugned judgment and order dated 18.07.2024, passed by the Appellate Court, Raebareli, in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2024, which was preferred against the order dated 05.06.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Raebareli, arising out of Case Crime No. 159 of 2024, under Sections 364, 302, 201 and 34 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Raebareli, are hereby set aside.

13. Let Juvenile Delinquent X Thru. His Father Y 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 brother 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.

14. 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. December 3, 2025 dk/ (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.) DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, Ms. Rani Singh brief holder for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The instant criminal revision under Section 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act has been filed against the judgement and order dated

18.07.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, (Exclusive-I)/ Justice Juvenile Court, Raebareli in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2023 as well as the order dated 05.06.2024 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Raebareli in Case Crime No. 159 of 2024 under Sections 364,302,201,34 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar District Raebareli.

3. By the impugned order learned Juvenile Justice Board had rejected the bail application of the revisionist, who has been declared Juvenile in conflict of law vide order dated 05.06.2024.

4. Feeling aggrieved by rejection of bail, Juvenile appeal was preferred before the Special Judge, POCSO Act (Exclusive-I)/ Justice Juvenile Court, Raebareli bearing Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2024 under Section 101 102 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act, which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated

18.07.2024. It is also stated in the impugned order that cause of death is Asphyxia due to strangulation associated with Coma. The offence is premeditated . The juvenile is co-accused had conspire and kill the deceased in furtherance of conspiracy and concealed the dead body .

5. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist is not named in the FIR . The name of the revisionist was surfaced in the confessional statement of co- accused/ Robin dated 16.03.2024 wherein he has stated that he was in love with a girl whose marriage was fixed with the deceased. He became infuriated after knowing this fact and he conspired to kill Ravi Shanker son of Jagdish Singh with the assistance of his friends Lov Kush Tiwari, Rishi Rajpoot and Ashu Singh. Rishi Rajput caught legs 2 CRLR No. 878 of 2024 of the deceased, Lov Kush Tiwari caught his hand and Ashu Sigh and Robin Singh strangulated him till death by rope around his neck due to which he died. The dead body was thrown in the water of river bank.

6. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that even if reliance has been placed on the alleged confessional statement, the only role assigned to the revisionist is catching hand of the deceased at the time of incident. He has not been attributed role of killing the deceased in the incident and he has been falsely implicated of this case. There is no valid evidence against the revisionist regarding the complicity in the offence. He is in custody of observation home since 21.03.2024 and no credible evidence has been collected against the revisionist during investigation. The dead body of the deceased was recovered on the pointing out of co-accused Robin Singh.

7. He further submitted that juvenile Rishi Rajput and one of the main accused Ashu Singh have already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the revisionist stands better footing than that of accused persons to enlarge on bail.

8. He also submitted that it is stated in the impugned order dated 05.06.2024 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, the District Probation Office has stated in its report dated

03.05.2024 that juvenile has not been granted proper protection. A criminal act attributed to the juvenile appears to be result of inappropriate family atmosphere and wrong association. but it is stated in the report that his reformation is probable in reformatory atmosphere . His the father is agriculturist and the mother is home maker. His father is guardian . A certificate of Gram Pradhan of the village has also filed wherein it has been stated that the juveile is presently studying in Class XII . He may be associated with some skill development programme for improvement. He lastly submitted that there is nothing in the report of District Probation Officer in case of the grant of bail to juvenile, he may be exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger or he may be associated with known criminal due to which his enlargement on bail, the ends of justice will defeat .

9. Per contra, learned brief holder for the State has opposed the bail of the juvenile and submits that the offence is of serious in nature and in the report of District Probation Officer his surrounding atmosphere has not been found congenial.

10. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the revision, impugned orders, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents.

11. Thus, having regard to overall facts and circumstances of the case, including that co-accused namely Ashu Singh having similar role has already been granted bail by this Court as also the period of incarceration i.e. about eighteen months, I find force in the revision. Accordingly, the revision is allowed. 3 CRLR No. 878 of 2024

12. The impugned judgment and order dated 18.07.2024, passed by the Appellate Court, Raebareli, in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2024, which was preferred against the order dated 05.06.2024 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Raebareli, arising out of Case Crime No. 159 of 2024, under Sections 364, 302, 201 and 34 IPC, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Raebareli, are hereby set aside.

13. Let Juvenile Delinquent X Thru. His Father Y 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 brother 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.

14. 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. December 3, 2025 dk/ (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.) DEVENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench