GAJENDRA KUMAR
Deepak @ Bhoora – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Gajendra Kumar, J.
1. It appears that name of the revisionist-juvenile has been disclosed in the memo of revision. This fault from the side of revisionist escaped detection by the Registry. The concerned Officer of the Registry is directed to delete the name of the revisionist-minor from the title of the revision as fed and shown in the data on website and represent him as "Minor 'X' Through His Natural Guardian Father Arjun Singh".
2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the private respondents and perused the record.
3. This criminal revision under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, has been filed on behalf of the minor 'X' through his natural guardian/father Arjun Singh s/o Mohan Singh, R/o Village-Gokulpur, Police Station Nidhauli Kalan, District Etah with the prayer to admit the minor on bail alongwith the prayer to set aside the order dated 15.11.2021 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Etah and order dated 20.01.2022 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Etah in Criminal Appeal No.48 of 2021 arising out of Case Cri
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.