Anil Kumar v. The State NCT of Delhi

1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 15.1.2005 and order on conviction dated 19.1.2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, whereby the appellant has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs.1000/-, and in default of payment of fine, two months RI for the offence punishable under Sections 392/397/34 IPC.

2. At the time of hearing of the present appeal, counsel for the appellant had raised a plea of juvenility on the ground that on the date of the incident the appellant was 17 years old. In support of this contention, a School Leaving Certificate of the appellant had been placed on record as per which the date of birth of the appellant has been shown as 16.11.1983. The State was directed to verify the school leaving certificate. Necessary verification has been carried out. 2013:DHC:6542

3. The Principal of Government Boys Sr. Sec. School, K-Block, Jahangir Puri, Delhi, has issued a certificate dated 6.12.2013 to the effect that the appellant was a student of class VI up to 14.08.1995 and according as per the school record his date of birth is 16.11.1983. The School Leaving Certificate was issued to the appellant on 09.01.2001. The number of School Leaving Certificate is 27 and admission number is 3909. The Principal has also certified that the particulars stand verified from the admission and withdrawal registers. In view of the verification, which has been carried out, I am of the opinion that a further inquiry in the matter would be a useless formality.

4. As per the nominal roll, appellant has served a sentence of one year and 21 days. Section 15 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, prescribes a maximum sentence of 03 years to a juvenile, however, learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the present case, although the appellant was a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence but now he has attained majority and, hence, he cannot be sent to Juvenile Care Observation Home.

5. While there is force in this submission made by the counsel for the appellant, the short question which would come for consideration is the procedure and nature of course to be adopted in a case where the person has not completed the maximum sentence of 03 years as prescribed under Section 15 and in the meanwhile has attained majority. In my view, two situations can arise. Firstly, is a case where a juvenile in conflict with law attains majority soon before or soon after he has been awarded a sentence in terms of Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. Another situation, which may arise as in the present case, is where a person has not only attained majority while serving his sentence but has also advanced in age by many years, on the date of award of sentence under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.

6. In the first situation, recourse would be taken to Section 64 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and explanation thereto where a juvenile in conflict with law would be housed for a period not exceeding three years in a special home or institution. In the present case, as per the certificate of the appellant, his current age is over 30 years. Thus, a distinction has to be drawn between a juvenile, who has just crossed the age of majority and a person, who has, may be through no fault of his, been in jail with regular convicts for many years and has also advanced in age in the process as in this case. In my view, the Act does not contemplate such a situation, nor has such a distinction been drawn. But in case both the categories of persons are allowed to intermingle, it would have a negative influence on those juveniles, who have crossed into majority during the period they were awarded punishment under Section 15 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act and which may defeat the very purpose of the said Act. In these circumstances, it is directed that (i) the appellant shall appear before the Board within ten days from today and he shall furnish a bond of good behaviour for a period of two years to the satisfaction of the board; (ii) his conduct will be monitored by the Probation Officer, and (iii) he shall be sent to a special home or may be kept in a fit institution in such manner as the State Government may deem fit and appropriate to enable him to serve the remainder period of his sentence. It is again clarified that since the appellant is approximately 30 years of age, he shall not be kept with juveniles, who are serving the sentence in terms of Section 15 of the Act or under-adults, who have just attained majority.

7. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of in above terms.

8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Board. Copy of this order be given DASTI to counsel for the parties under the signature of Court Master. G.S.SISTANI, J DECEMBER 19, 2013 rb