X (MINOR) Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Kumar Kartikey, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Mir Sayed, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

(2.) The Present Criminal Revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father under Sec. 102 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as "JJ Act, 2015") against the judgment dtd. 10/6/2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Court No. 1 Ghaziabad in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2022, whereby the appellate court has rejected the Criminal appeal and affirmed the order dtd. 22/9/2021 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Ghaziabad. The Juvenile Justice Board has rejected the bail application of the revisionist, which has been filed by his natural guardian/father, under Sec. 12 of "JJ Act, 2015" in Bail Application No. 146 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 413 of 2021, under Ss. 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short "I.P.C."), Police Station- Tronica City, District-Ghaziabad.

(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that the revisionist was 17 years, 04 months and 10 days old at the time of the incident. As per educational certificate, the Juvenile Justice Board declared the revisionist as juvenile vide order dtd. 19/8/2021 and no proceeding is pending against the order.