Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 610 of 2019 Revisionist :- Neeraj @ Sonveer Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Tripathi B.G. Bhai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Agrawal
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Tripathi B.G. Bhai, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Arvind Agrawal, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Jai Narayan, learned AGA for the State.
This revisionist has been preferred to set aside the impugned order dated 3.1.2019, passed by the Special Judge (Juvenile Court), Court No.8, Firozabad in Bail Application (Juvenile) No. 3427 of 2018 (Neeraj @ Sonveer Singh Vs. State) arising out of Case Crime No.913 of 2017, under Sections 452, 376, 302 and 511 IPC, P.S. Tundala, District Firozabad.
Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist has found to be juvenile and he is in jail since 6.2.2018, hence he is entitled to be enlarged on bail by this Court.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA have opposed the prayer for bail and have argued that against the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, declaring the revisionist juvenile, a Criminal Revision No.4284 of 2018 has been preferred by the opposite party no.2 which is tagged with the present revision. This Court has allowed the said revision observing that the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, declaring him was illegal and suffer from manifest error of law and the same has been set aside today and the revisionist has been found to be major, hence, the present revision is liable to be dismissed.
After having considered the submissions advance by both the learned counsel for the parties, as the revisionist plea of juvenility has been challenged by the opposite party no.2 in the Criminal Revision No.4284 of the 2018 and the same has been allowed by this Court today by setting aside the order of the Juvenile Justice Board coming to the conclusion that the revisionist was major on the date of the offence, hence, he is not entitled to be released on bail in the present revision on the plea of juvenility.
The present revision is, accordingly, dismissed.
However, the revisionist is at liberty to move a Bail Application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. before the Competent Court which shall be decided by the Court concerned, expeditiously, in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 31.7.2019 Neeraj