VISHAL KANNAUJIYA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision under Sec. 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short the J.J. Act, 2015), instituted against the order dtd. 26/8/2020 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Gorakhpur in Case Crime no. 09 of 2020 (State Vs. Vishal Kannaujiya), under Sec. 376 IPC read with Sec. 5/6 of the Prevention of Child from Sexual Offence Act, 2012, hereinafter referred to as the 'POCSO Act', P.S. Khajani, District Gorakhpur as well as the order dtd. 27/11/2020 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.1, Gorakhpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 62 of 2020, Vishal Kannaujiya Vs. State of U.P. and others refusing the bail to the revisionist.

(2.) Brief facts of the case setforth by the revisionist are that the prosecution has alleged that the victim Miss Neeraj Kannaujiya, daughter of Ram Laut Kannaujiya is 17 years old, as whereas revisionist-juvenile being Master Vishal Kannaujiya son of Rajesh Kannaujiya was aged about 16 years, they were found wandering in a suspicious condition in Kasba Khajani on the unlucky day, i.e, 28/12/2019. On interception, the juvenile as well as the victim Neeraj Kannaujiya apprised the police personnel that they were not willing to go to their respective houses as they wanted to live together. Faced with these circumstances, one Sri Rudra Pratap Singh, Sub-Inspector, P.S. Khajani, District Gorakhpur made a communication to the designated official of Child Welfare Committee, District Gorakhpur clearly narrating the fact that the juvenile and the victim both of them were not agreeable to go to their respective houses and further despite the fact that information was provided to the parents of the juvenile and the victim, none of them approached them to take custody of the juvenile or the victim and thus request was being sought to be made to them that the victim as well as the revisionist be taken into the custody of the Child Welfare Committee, District Gorakhpur for their upkeep, care and betterment.

(3.) It appears that on the same day, i.e, on 28/12/2019, G.D. entry was also made narrating the facts, which had been communicated on 28/12/2019 by the Sub-Inspector, P.S. Khajani, Gorakhpur to the Child Welfare Committee, Gorakhpur. Thereafter, FIR was lodged by one Sri Krishna Sinha being the member of the Child Welfare Committee, Gorakhpur before the police station Khajani, Gorakhpur dtd. 16/1/2020 registered as Case Crime no. 0009 of 2020 with an allegation that on 28/12/2019 itself the police officials found the revisionist and the victim together in suspicious condition and further on medical examination, it revealed that UPT was positive depicting that she was pregnant. It was also alleged that the father of the victim had not lodged the FIR because the victim was a minor and that will create negative impact upon the character of the victim. Statement of the complainant being Sri Krishna Sinha, Chairman / Member, Child Welfare Committee, District Gorakhpur was recorded on 17/1/2020 under Sec. 161 CrPC, wherein the same facts were reiterated, which already found place in the FIR. It has also come on record that despite being request administered to the parents of the victim, as well as the victim for getting her medically examined, she refused for the same. The statement of the victim was also recorded under Sec. 164 CrPC, a certified copy of the same is at page 70 of the paper book, wherein the victim has deposed that she is of 17 years of age and she is in love with the revisionist for the past three months and she according to her sweet will has married with the revisionist. Consequent to the initiation of the proceedings emanating from the FIR, the revisionist is in observation home since 22/7/2020, and the proceeding has been registered as Case Crime no. 9 of 2020, under Sec. 376 IPC read with Sec. 5/6 of POCSO Act.