Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 196 of 2021 Revisionist :- Nikhil (Minor) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Mohammad Abid Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist-applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist-applicant with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 14.12.2020 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.1, Ghaziabad in Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 2020 (Smt. Annu Sharma Vs. State), by which appeal of the revisionist-applicant was dismissed and the order dated 12.11.2020 passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad in Misc. Case No. 90 of 2020 (State Vs. Nikhil), arising out of Case Crime No. 725 of 2020, under Sections 376-D, 506 IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad, has been affirmed.
As per the Office report dated 29.06.2021, notice has been served upon the opposite party no.2 through heir, however, despite being served, no one has appeared on his behalf.
Learned counsel for the revisionist-applicant has submitted that on the date of incident, the applicant has been found to be 15 years, 8 months and 22 days of age. He has next submitted that the applicant has been declared juvenile by Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad vide order dated 20.10.2020.
Learned counsel for the revisionist-applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the report of District Probation Officer, in which, nothing adverse has been pointed out against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the revisionist-applicant has next submitted that similarly placed co-accused Ankit (Minor) has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Revision No. 507 of 2021 vide order dated 07.12.2021 and case of the applicant stands on the same footing as that of the co-accused Ankit.
Learned counsel for the revisionist-applicant has next submitted that the Juvenile Justice Board has rejected the bail application of the revisionist-applicant and has held that in case, revisionist-applicant is released on bail, he may fall in the company of known and unknown criminals, however, no reason has been assigned by the Juvenile Justice Board to arrive at such a conclusion.
Learned counsel for the revisionist-applicant has next submitted that Juvenile Justice Board as well as Additional Sessions Judge has not given any convincing reason for rejecting the bail application of the revisionist- applicant and has held that in case, he is released on bail that may 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.
Learned counsel for the revisionist-applicant has next submitted that the revisionist-applicant is in juvenile home since 04.09.2020 and has no criminal history to his credit and prospects of conclusion of trial at an early date is very bleak due to heavy dockets, as such, he be released on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the revisionist-applicant has made out a case for bail.
In view of the above, this criminal revision is allowed. Impugned orders dated 14.12.2020 and 12.11.2020 are set-aside and the bail application of the revisionist- applicant is allowed.
Let the revisionist-applicant Nikhil (Minor) be released on bail in this case on furnishing an undertaking by natural guardian mother Smt. Annu Sharma that she will take proper care over the revisionist-applicant and she will not allow him to go in the company of known criminals or expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger and she will also file a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned.
Order Date :- 16.12.2021 Nadim