The Allahabad High Court has recently denied bail to the juvenile who was engaged in teaching religious scriptures and being accused of sexually assaulting his 8-year-old girl student.

A Single Bench of Justice Jyotsna Sharma stated that "The shock and trauma caused to the victim as well as her family can easily be understood. This kind of violent sexual assault is an indicator that accused needs counselling by psychiatrist/experts not only for his own betterment but also for the health of society. He needs to be extended services of reformatory and rehabilitatory nature so that he can move without posing danger to himself as well as to public and so that he can be brought back to main stream."

The girl in this case had sustained injuries on her private part from which the blood was oozing out.

The Court while dismissing the criminal revision filed by the accused challenging the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Kasganj and the Special Judge (POCSO) Act further held –

"To prevent ends of justice from being defeated and to achieve the aim and goal of the salutary act, he should be kept in observation home under strict supervision and should be extended such reformatory services as are available under the scheme of the act."

Advocate Brij Singh appeared for the revisionist i.e., the accused while Government Advocate represented the opposite party i.e., the State.

In the present case, the victim who resided with her grandmother used to go to the residence of the accused to study religious scriptures, and one afternoon, after returning from the accused's residence, she told her mother that the accused had sexually assaulted her and threatened her to not inform the police. Hence, an FIR was registered and on medical examination, injuries on the victim's private part were found. In the age determination inquiry done by the Juvenile Justice Board, the accused was found to be below 18 years of age.

A case was registered against the accused under Sections 376AB, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5, 6 of the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The matter was before the High Court.

The Court noted that "As per social investigation report, he has not been to regular school and is uneducated and that he belonged to a very poor family. His parents too are illiterate and do physical labour. In my opinion, he cannot be given that kind of atmosphere in his family as is required for his healthy physical and psychological growth. Prima-facie, it appears that he is in real need of intensive counselling. Such a service cannot be provided effectively outside the observation home/child care institution. Besides such measure may be required so that he grows into an adult with healthy mind to serve his own best interest as well as the interest of the society at large."

The Court also opined that such a juvenile is in need of counselling and is required to be put under the constant supervision of professionals.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the criminal revision.

Cause Title – X (Juvenile) v. State of U.P. And 3 Others

Click here to read/download the Order