HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. – 4195 of 2018
Revisionist :- Shoeb @ Suheb
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Tapan Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Govind Mathur,Chief Justice
The revision-petitioner is admittedly a juvenile. He is facing trial for commission of offence under Section 377 Indian Penal Code and Section 5/6 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
The Juvenile Justice Board, Budaun under an order dated 3rd July, 2018 rejected the application preferred under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 by taking into consideration gravity of the offence. The Board while dismissing the application has not taken into consideration the recommendation made by the Probation Officer. The Probation Officer in quite unambiguous terms stated that the juvenile in conflict of law is of 14 years and he requires necessary counselling. The Probation Officer also referred the normal family background of the juvenile. The appellate court too while affirming the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board dated 3rd July, 2018 vide its order dated 15th September, 2018 has not taken into consideration the recommendations made by the Probation Officer.
I have looked into the statements given by the victim, the recommendation made by the Probation Officer and also considered the fact that the revision-petitioner is behind the bars since 7th March, 2017.
Section 12 of the Act of 2015 pertain to release of a person on bail who is apparently a child alleged to be in conflict with law. As per proviso to Section 12, bail to such person can be denied if there appears reasonable grounds for believing the release is likely to bring that person into association with any known criminal or expose the said person to moral, physical or psychological danger or the such person’s release would defeat the ends of justice. The Board is further required to record reasons while denying bail to such person.
In the instant matter, the consideration as required under Section 12 of the Act of 2015 has not been made by the Board as well as the appellate court.
The non-consideration of relevant facts makes the orders passed under Section 12 of the Act of 2015 bad in eye of law.
Looking to the facts available on record including the recommendation made by the Probation Officer to the extent that the family background of the revision-petitioner is normal and he requires counselling at home and also keeping in mind the fact that he is behind the bars since 7th March, 2018, I am inclined to accept this application. Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed. The order dated 15th September, 2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Ghaziabad and the order dated 3rd July, 2018 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad are hereby set aside. The application preferred under Section 12 of the Act of 2015 on behalf of the revision-petitioner is allowed.
Let the applicant Shoeb @ Suheb involved in Case Crime No.235 of 2018, under Section 377 Indian Penal Code and Section 5/6 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad be released on bail provided his father Islamuddin furnishes a surety in a tune of Rs.10,000/- with an undertaking to take complete care of the juvenile in delinquency. The juvenile said to be in conflict with law shall also remain under usual observation of the District Probation Officer, Ghaziabad who will submit his report about the conduct of the revision-petitioner to the Board month by month till disposal of the trial or till attaining the majority, whichever is earlier.
Order Date :- 20.4.2020
(Govind Mathur, C.J.)