HRADYANSH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Mahadeo Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Gyan Prakash, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

(2.) This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.12.2019 passed by Additional Session Judge/(F.T.C.-1)/Special Judge (POCSO Act) Banda dismissing the Criminal Appeal No.16 of 2019 (Hradyansh vs. State of U.P. and another) under Section 102 of the the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 (for short 'the Act') and affirming an order of Juvenile Justice Board, Banda, dated 19.11.2019 refusing the bail plea to the revisionist in Case Crime No.83 of 2019 (State vs. Hradyansh), under sections 302, 307, 504 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Banda.

(3.) The facts of the present case is that the revisionist was minor at the time of incident. He was aged about 13 years 11 months and he was declared minor by Medical Board vide order dated 18.2.2019. He further submitted that revisionist grandfather is deceased in the present case and due to property dispute, the incident occurred and main role has been assigned to accused Devraj, father of the revisionist. He further submitted that co-accused Devansh, brother of the revisionist has been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc.Bail Application No.38404 of 2019 vide order dated 24.09.2019. The revisionist is student of Class VIII and main role is assigned to co-accused Devraj, father of the deceased and general role has been assigned to all other co-accused persons. There is no independent witnesses and due to family disputes, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The mother of the minor has submitted that she will take care of her minor son and she will not permit her minor son to come in contact with the criminal minded persons. The revisionist is in observation since 16.02.2019 more than one and half years have been passed.