Notice was issued to opposite party no. 2 but none is present from the side of the opposite party no. 2.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist an learned A.G.A. for the State.
This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 15.10.2019 passed by the Sessions Judge, Budaun, in Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 2019 as well as order dated 5.9.2019 passed by Juvenile Justice Board in Case Crime No. 77 of 2018 under sections 498A, 304-B IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mujariya, District Budaun, whereby both the Courts below have rejected the bail application moved on behalf of the revisionist.
Submission made by the learned counsel for the revisionist is that both the forums i.e. Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court have not taken into consideration the law which is provided for dealing with the bail application of the revisionist and rejected the bail of the revisionist erroneously only on the ground of seriousness of the offence. It is further argued that age of the revisionist was found to be 17 years 5 months and 12 days on the date of occurrence by the Juvenile Justice Board vide order dated 18.7.2019. For considering the bail of juvenile, as per settled law, the gravity of offence is not to be seen. Only three criteria laid down under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act ought to be taken into consideration which are that, if accused-revisionist is released on bail there is no likelihood of his coming in association with any known criminal or that his release would not expose him to any moral, physical and psychological danger/threat or that ends of justice would not be defeated by his release. He has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail but could not controvert the aforesaid fact.
I find that there is no direct evidence in this case. Moreover in district probation officer's report, nothing adverse has been recorded in the said report against the accused-revisionist which would lead this court to the belief that in case he is released on bail, he would come in association with any known criminal or would be exposed to moral, physical or psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of justice.
In view of the above, this is found to be a fit case for grant of bail. The revision deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. The impugned order of Juvenile Justice Board dated 5.9.2019 as well as order dated 15.10.2019 of the appellate court are set aside.
Let the Juvenile revisionist- Hemant Kumar be released on bail through his fatherBiaharee Lal furnishing a personal bond of Rs. one lac and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board on furnishing an undertaking that he shall not allow the revisionist to come in association with any hardened criminal and shall take care of his education and well being and that on each and every date of trial, he shall also appear before the court concerned. In case, he makes any default, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 A.P. Pandey