Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 3492 of 2017 Revisionist :- Bhanu Pratap Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- K.K.Rao Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.9.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-1, Maharajganj, in Criminal Appeal No.55 of 2016 (Bhanu Pratap Yadav vs. State of U.P.), and the order dated 7.10.2016 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Maharajganj, in bail application No.11 of 2016 (State Vs. Narad and others) arising out of Case Crime No.73 of 2016, under Sections 147, 323, 506, 394, 304 I.P.C., Police Station Nautanwa District Maharajganj, rejecting the bail application of the revisionist (juvenile).
Despite service of notice, upon opposite party nos.2 and 3 which is received back after service personally as reported by the office in its report dated 27.2.2018, no one has appeared on their behalf to argue the matter.
Heard Sri K.K.Rao, learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the impugned orders along with entire material on record.
It is contended by learned counsel for the revisionist that co-accused Salman was also declared juvenile and he has been allowed bail by an order dated 29.8.2017 passed in Criminal Revision No.2834 of 2016, despite it other accused Surendra, who was major has also been enlarged on bail. The revisionist is admittedly to be declared a juvenile in conflict with law.
Learned counsel for the revisionist has contended that the revisionist is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is further contended that the revisionist has been declared juvenile but his bail application has been rejected by the learned Board as well as by learned Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal without any convincing basis for giving finding that if the revisionist is released he is likely to come into association with several known and unknown criminals and expose them to moral, physical or psychological danger or his release would defeat the ends of justice.
Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
I have considered the submissions made by the parties' counsel and perused the impugned orders passed by the learned courts below along with entire material on record as well as the provisions of the Act.
The provisions of bail to a juvenile is given in Section 12 of the Act. The said provision provides that a juvenile accused has to be released on bail unless there are reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely to bring him into association with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice. There is no any basis or material which may bring the case of the revisionist within the exceptions provided in Section 12 of the Act.
There is no such substantial material or evidence on record to show that by release on bail, the revisionist would come in association with any known criminal or his release would expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger. There is also nothing very substantial on record to show that the release of the revisionist on bail would defeat the ends of justice.
In these circumstances, the Board was not quite justified in rejecting the bail application of the revisionist. Learned Sessions Judge also does not appear to have considered the provisions of Section 12 of the Act in its proper perspective. Thus, both the impugned orders are not sustainable and are liable to be set-aside.
Accordingly, the revision stands allowed. The order dated 15.9.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-1, Maharajganj, in Criminal Appeal No.55 of 2016 (Bhanu Pratap Yadav vs. State of U.P.), and the order dated 7.10.2016 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Maharajganj, in bail application No.11 of 2016 (State Vs. Narad and others) arising out of Case Crime No.73 of 2016, under Sections 147, 323, 506, 394, 304 I.P.C., Police Station Nautanwa District Maharajganj, are set-aside.
The revisionist, Bhanu Pratap Yadav son of Narad Yadav through his Mother Yashoda Devi wife of Narad Yadav (Natural guardian) resident of Kohadwal P.S. Nautanwa, District Maharajganj, involved in aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond through his legal guardian and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Board concerned.
Order Date :- 28.2.2018 Hasnain