AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Despite notice to opposite party no.2/the informant, none appeared on his behalf except learned A.G.A.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 11.6.2026 passed by learned Court of Juvenile/Additional Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court no. 8, Ballia in Criminal Juvenile Appeal No. 67 of 2026 (Juvenile 'X' vs. State of UP) as well as order dated 11.5.2026 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Ballia. Further prayed to release the revisionist on bail in Case Crime No. 11 of 2026 under Sections 109(1) B.N.S. Police Station-Maniar, District Ballia.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that the allegation has been made for causing injury to the injured on his head that is false. He further submits that he is aged about 14 years having no criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that there is nothing adverse against the interest of the delinquent in the report submitted by D.P.O.
It is further submitted that the provisions as contained u/s 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act had not been considered by the Juvenile Justice Board even the report submitted by Probation Officer was also not considered. The appellate court has also not considered all these facts but rejected the appeal without applying its judicial mind and considering the law as contained u/s 12 of the aforesaid Act. He is in Child Care Home since 23.01.2026 and his psychology is being affected adversely, therefore, requested to set aside orders passed by the J.J. Board as well as appellate court and allow the criminal revision.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perusal of record, the period he detained in observation home, the age of the revisionist, the provisions as contained u/s 12 of Juvenile Justice Act, the report submitted by the Probation Officer, it appears that Juvenile Justice Board as well as the appellate court had not considered the relevant provisions and the material on record in well manner but passed the orders without applying their judicial mind. In this way, there appears ground in this revision and the orders passed by the Juvenile Justice Board as well as learned appellate court are liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the orders passed by Juvenile Justice Board dated 11.05.2026 and the appellate court dated 11.06.2026 are, hereby, set aside and present criminal revision is hereby, allowed.
It is directed that delinquent/applicant be released on bail on executing person bond by the revisionist (father of the delinquent) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on following conditions :-
The revisionist/ father will furnish an undertaking that upon release on bail the revisionist will not be permitted to go into contact or association with any known criminal or allowed to be exposed to any moral, physical, or psychological danger and further that the father will ensure that the juvenile will not repeat the offence.
The revisionist/ father will further furnish an undertaking to the effect that the juvenile will pursue his study at the appropriate level which he would be encouraged to do besides other constructive activities and not be allowed to waste his time in unproductive and excessive recreational pursuits.
Juvenile and the revisionist/ father will report to the Probation Officer on the first Monday of every calendar month.
The Probation Officer will keep a strict vigil on the activities of the juvenile and regularly draw up his social investigation report that would be submitted to the Juvenile Justice Board concerned on such a periodical basis as the Juvenile Justice Board may determine.