Aas Mohammad @ Ashu vs State of Uttarakhand & another

This Criminal Revision has been filed by the revisionist for setting aside the judgment and order dated 13.02.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No. 02 of 2017 and the order dated 23.12.2016 in Case Crime No. 370 of 2016 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board/ Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Haridwar. It has also been prayed that the applicant/revisionist may be granted bail in Case Crime No. 370 of 2016, under Section 302 of I.P.C., registered at P.S. Manglore, District Haridwar.

Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that revisionist was arrested in connection with Case Crime No. 370 of 2016, relating to offences punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. The revisionist moved the bail application before the Juvenile Justice Board; but, the same was rejected by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Haridwar vide order dated 23.12.2016. Against the said order the revisionist preferred an appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO, Haridwar. The same was rejected by the Learned Additional Sessions

Judge/ Special Judge, POCSO, Haridwar vide judgment and order dated 13.02.2017.

Learned counsel for the revisionist argued that the order passed by the Juvenile Board is incorrect as the Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board has not appreciated the fact that revisionist is Juvenile. The date of birth of the revisionist as per High School certificate is 01.07.1999 and, on the day of incident, he was juvenile. Section 12 (1) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, provides that when any person, who is apparently a child and is alleged to have committed a bailable or non-bailable offence, is apprehended or detained by the police or appears or brought before a Board, such person shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or in any other law for the time being in force, be released on bail with or without surety or placed under the supervision of a Probation Officer or under the care of any fit person:

Provided that such person shall not be so released if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that 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 person''s release would defeat the ends of justice, and the Board shall record the reasons for denying the bail and circumstances that led to such a decision.

Thus, as per Section 12 (1) of the Act, the revisionist shall be subject to the condition mentioned in the Act. In the present case, admittedly, the revisionist is a Juvenile. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the family members of the

revisionist have no criminal history. Parents of the revisionist are ready to keep revisionist with him and are ready to give undertaking.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds it a fit case for granting bail.

The revision is allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 13.02.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO, Haridwar in Criminal Appeal No. 02 of 2017 and also order dated 23.12.2016 passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board/ Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Haridwar is set aside.

Let revisionist Aas Mohammad @ Ashu be released on bail on executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties each of the like amount by his natural guardian and father to the satisfaction of Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Board Haridwar. His father shall give undertaking that the Juvenile will remain in his custody.