SACHIN AHIRWAR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. This revision has been filed by the applicant through his legal guardian/mother Trivedi Bai under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 2000") being aggrieved by impugned judgment dated 15-2-2014 passed by Ninth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Criminal Appeal No. 38/2014 affirming the order dated 31-1-2014 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Jabalpur in Criminal Case No. 285/2013 whereby the application for releasing the applicant on Supurdginama, has been dismissed.

(2.) The facts, in short, giving rise to this revision are that juvenile Sachin Ahirwar was arrested in connection with Crime No. 370/2013 registered at P.S. Ghamapur, District Jabalpur for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 148 and 149 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. After due investigation, he was charge-sheeted before Juvenile Justice Board. Thereafter, Triveni Bai, legal guardian/mother of juvenile Sachin preferred an application before Juvenile Justice Board for releasing him on Supurdginama, which was dismissed vide order dated 6-7-2013 passed in Criminal Case No. 676/2013, being aggrieved thereby an appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 118/2013) was preferred before Ninth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, which was also dismissed vide judgment dated 25-7-2013. Being aggrieved thereby, a revision (Criminal Revision No. 109/2014) was preferred before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 28-1-2014 with liberty to move a fresh application under Section 12 of the Act, 2000 before the Juvenile Justice Board stating the ground that all other co-accused persons including one Juvenile have been granted bail on Supurdginama. In view of the liberty granted by this Court, an application was again preferred before Juvenile Justice Board, which was also dismissed vide order dated 31-1-2014. Being aggrieved thereby, an appeal was again preferred before the Sessions Court, which was also dismissed vide impugned judgment, hence this revision.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that the Courts below have erred in appreciating the facts on record. Similarly, placed co-accused juvenile Akhilesh has already been released on Supurdginama of his mother by the Appellate Court vide judgment dated 28-11-2013 and the case of present juvenile is on similar footing. The other co-accused, who are facing trial before the Sessions Court, have already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 30-9-2013 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 11434/2013, therefore, the impugned judgment be set aside and applicant be released on Supurdginama of his mother.