E-Paper
HC expresses concern over ‘minor’ lodged in regular jail, allows bail
Trial court which failed to decide juvenility plea for more than a year, asked to decide the issue ‘at the earliest’
Allowing bail to a minor boy languishing in a regular jail for a year, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has expressed concern over the trial court’s delay in deciding his application claiming juvenility.
The applicant was lodged in Pratapgarh jail from March 2024 under several sections of the POCSO Act. The FIR was lodged with the Aasupur Deosara police station, Pratapgarh, on March 6, 2024.
He was accused of enticing the complainant’s daughter aged around 13 years on the night of March 4, 2024.
On May 16, 2025, a single judge bench of justice Subhash Vidyarthi stated that the minor victim, aged around 13 years, has not levelled any allegations against the applicant who is aged around 16 years.
Therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, added the court.
The court also expressed concern over the Pratapgharh trial court’s failure to decide the application of the applicant (accused boy) filed on April 8, 2024, claiming himself a juvenile.
“The approach of the trial court in not deciding the application (dated 08.04.2024) given by the applicant for declaring him a juvenile in conflict with law has compelled the applicant child to remain in jail with under-trial accused persons and convicts for more than one year,” said the court.
“In case the trial court ultimately comes to a conclusion that the applicant is a juvenile in conflict with law, the loss which has been caused to the applicant by making him spend a period of more than one year in regular jail with under-trial accused persons and convicts, cannot be made good by any means,” added the court.
The court added: “The Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, provides that any person in whose charge a child in conflict with law is placed, shall, while the order is in force, have responsibility of the said child, as if the said person was the child’s parent and responsible for the child’s maintenance.”
“When the applicant was lodged in jail, it was the duty of the Jail authorities to have taken care of his interests as his parents and they should have taken appropriate steps to ensure that the benefits of the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act were provided to the applicant,” asserted the court.
The court also directed the special judge, POCSO Court, Pratapgarh, to decide at the earliest whether the applicant is a juvenile or not.
The court also directed the registrar general of the high court to circulate a copy of this order to all the judicial officers in the state through the district judges of all the districts with the object of sensitising judicial officers to be more careful while dealing with criminal matters where the accused appears to be a juvenile or claims to be a juvenile.
