Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2104 of 2018 Revisionist :- Khushhal Kuraishi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Revisionist :- Vijay Bahadur Shivhare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajiv Dwivedi
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA.
By means of the instant revision, the revisionist is assailing the order dated 15.05.2018 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Court No. 3, Chitrakoot in Criminal Appeal No. 08 of 2018 (Khushhal Kuraishi v. State of U.P.) affirming the order dated 29.01.2018 passed by the Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, Chitrakoot whereby bail application of the applicant has been rejected in Misc. Case No. 21 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No. 953 of 2014 (State v. Khushhal Kuraishi), under sections 332, 323, 223 and 224 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Karvi, District Chitrakoot.
Perused the record specially the orders dated 09.01.2019 and 07.02.2019 passed by this Court.
There seems that initially an erroneous order was passed on 09.01.2019, which was eventually withdrawn by this Court on 07.02.2019.
The present revision has been filed under section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 challenging the order dated 15.05.2018 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Court No. 3, Chitrakoot in Criminal Appeal No. 08 of 2018 (Khushhal Kuraishi v. State of U.P.) affirming the order dated 29.01.2018 passed by Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board, Chitrakoot in Misc. Case No. 21 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 953 of 2014 (State v Khushhal Kuraishi), under sections 333, 223 and 224 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Karvi, District Chitrakoot whereby bail application of the revisionist has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the revisionist is one of the accused in Case Crime no. 4 of 2018, under sections 376 Gha, 323, 342, 506, 201 IPC and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and was put behind the bars while he was in jail all the five accused persons in a dare devil manner broke the wall of the jail on 13.12.2014 and absconded from the judicial custody. On the same day, another FIR in Case Crime No. 953 of 2014, under sections 332, 333, 223, 224 IPC against the revisionist along with five other accused and at last they themselves surrendered after more than three years i.e. on 04.07.2017. Thereafter all of the accused were put to trial in the earlier case i.e., Case Crime no. 4 of 2018, under sections 376 Gha, 323, 342, 506, 201 IPC and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and all of them were acquitted in the aforesaid session trial vide judgement and order dated 02.01.2018 but after the submission of the report of the District Probation Officer, the Juvenile Justice Board, Chitrakoot vide order 29.01.2018 refused to grant bail to the revisionist whereupon the revisionist filed Criminal Appeal No. 08 of 2018 which was dismissed by the appellate court vide order 15.05.2018 and the revisionist is in jail since 04.07.2017.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the revisionist was earlier acquitted in Case Crime no. 4 if 2018, under sections 376 Gha, 323, 342, 506, 201 IPC and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, the order passed on 13.10.2017 by the Juvenile Justice Board, Chitrakoot in Misc. Case No. 30 of 2017 wherein the revisionist was opined to be a juvenile and his age was computed to be almost 16 years at the time of the alleged incident and now the revisionist is suffering incarceration in jail since last more than two years, the revision is liable to be allowed.
Let the juvenile revisionist -Khushhal Kuraishi be released on bail in the aforesaid case and be given in the custody of his parents, after having an undertaking from them, that they will not let him go in association with any known criminal or will not expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger and take care to make him an asset to the society, otherwise the ends of justice would be defeated as consideration for grant of bail to a delinquent juvenile and to an ordinary offender is entirely different.
Revision is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 27.2.2019 shailesh