KUSHAGRA MOKHRIWALE Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision U/S 53 of Juvenile Justice ( Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2000, ( herein after referred to as the Act) has been preferred by Kushagra Mokhariwale son of a bank cashier Diwakar Mokhriwale for being released on bail in crime no. 247 of 2011, under Section 386 I.P.C., P.S. Hariparwat, District Agra. For seeking desired relief revisionist has challenged impugned orders dated 20.4.2011 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Agra, and order dated 7.5.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Agra in Juvenile Appeal No. 116 of 2011. By the aforesaid orders, Juvenile Justice Board and appellate Court, both have refused to release the revisionist on bail in the aforementioned crime number for aforementioned offence.

(2.) Before entering into discussions on the contentions raised and opposed in this revision, a quick search light on the back ground facts indicate that informant Ramesh Nagvani lodged a FIR at P.S. Hariparwat on 25.3.2011 at 8.22 p.m. against the revisionist and management St. Paul's School, Bag Farjana, Civil Lines, Agra, registered as crime no. 247 of 2011, allegating therein that the informant is a resident of 51, Bag Farjana, Agra and his grand son Kushagra Nagvani S/o Devendra Nagvani, aged about 13 years, is a student of class 7th of St. Paul's School, Bag Farjana. Revisionist aged about 18 years son of Diwakar Mokhriwale, an employee of Punjab National Bank, Shahzad Mandi, Agra and resident of 2/47-A Ram Nagar Colony, Agra, a student of class 11th of the same institution, was extorting money since last two years by criminal intimidation and thereby had already extorted Rs. 25-30 lacs in cash and jewelery. When informant was made aware of it he contacted the Principal of the institution and informed him about the incident but the Principal replied that for such incidents, neither the institution nor he is personally responsible and the family members can deal with such incidents. Receiving such an answer informant conducted private inquiries, which revealed that revisionist had criminal mind with associations of persons indulging in criminal activities. On 25.3.2011, revisionist at 10.30 A.M. and 1 p.m. had called on grand son on his mobile number 9927656568 and had demanded Rs. 1,40,000/- and had threatened that in case the money is not parted with he will get the grandson abducted and annihilated. It was further allegated that because of such threats family members and the grand son were terrified. With such allegations informant had lodged his FIR on 25.3.2011 as annexure no. 1.

(3.) It seems that registration of crime resulted in apprehending the revisionist, who thereafter moved an application for being declared a juvenile. Vide order dated 11.4.2011, annexure no. 2, Juvenile Justice Board, Agra concluded that the date of birth of the revisionist is 7.10.1993 and hence on the date of the incident ie: 25.3.2011, revisionist was 17 years, 5 months and 18 days and hence is a juvenile in conflict with law. Copy of mark-sheet from ISCE, New Delhi, annexure no.3, also records the same date of birth of the revisionist.