Full Text
Translation output
CRL.REV.P. 133/2013 Page 1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.REV.P. 133/2013 & Crl.M.A. No.2794/2013
SUDHISH SANDILYA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. O.N. Sharma, Advocate
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.REV.P. 133/2013 & Crl.M.A. No.2794/2013
SUDHISH SANDILYA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. O.N. Sharma, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE GNCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Mukesh Gutpa, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with ASI
Rameshwar Prasad
Through: Mr. Mukesh Gutpa, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with ASI
Rameshwar Prasad
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R 04.07.2013
Petitioner is a juvenile who is facing trial in FIR No.537/1995 under Section 448/452/323/506/34 of IPC registered at P.S.Bhajanpura, Delhi. Impugned order of 4th February, 2013 rejects petitioner’s application under Section 7 of The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 and another application under Section 7A of The Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2000 filed before the trial court in February and December, 2012 respectively.
What is mandated by Section 7 of The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 and Section 7A of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2000 is substantially the same i.e. upon finding an accused to be juvenile, he or she is to be referred to the Juvenile Justice Board. Trial court while relying upon Section 20 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and
2013:DHC:3132
Petitioner is a juvenile who is facing trial in FIR No.537/1995 under Section 448/452/323/506/34 of IPC registered at P.S.Bhajanpura, Delhi. Impugned order of 4th February, 2013 rejects petitioner’s application under Section 7 of The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 and another application under Section 7A of The Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2000 filed before the trial court in February and December, 2012 respectively.
What is mandated by Section 7 of The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 and Section 7A of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2000 is substantially the same i.e. upon finding an accused to be juvenile, he or she is to be referred to the Juvenile Justice Board. Trial court while relying upon Section 20 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and
2013:DHC:3132
CRL.REV.P. 133/2013 Page 2
Protection of Children) Act, 2000 has rejected petitioner's application vide impugned order holding that instant case was pending when The
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 came into force and so, by virtue of Section 20 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2000, the proceedings before the criminal court, where the said case was pending, is to continue and after returning the findings, instead of passing any sentence, the juvenile accused is to be forwarded to the Juvenile Justice Board to pass an appropriate order under The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
Learned counsel for petitioner assails the impugned order on the ground that Section 7A of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2000 is mandatory and once petitioner has been found to be juvenile, then, proceedings before the criminal court ought not to continue and this case is to be straightaway sent to the Juvenile Justice
Board. In support of above submission, reliance has been placed on decisions in Ashwani Kumar Saxena v. State of M.P. 2012(9) SCALE;
Anil Aggarwal and Another v. State of West Bengal (2012) 9 SCC 768;
Amarchand Tiwari & Ors. v. State of M.P. 2012 Crl. L.J. 1028 and
Sameer K Shah v. State of Gujarat, Special Criminal Application No.452 of 2009 rendered on 29th April, 2010 by High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad.
The submissions advanced, case law cited and the impugned order have been duly considered and thereupon, it becomes evident that petitioner had filed the aforesaid application at the stage of defence evidence i.e. belatedly. Recourse to Section 20 of The Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 by the trial court is fully
CRL.REV.P. 133/2013 Page 3 justified particularly, when the application under Section 7 of The
Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (old Act) and Section 7A of The Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (new Act) has been filed at the fag end of the trial.
In the aforesaid background, reliance placed by petitioner on the afore-noted decisions is of no avail. Section 7A of The Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 cannot be made to apply to a pending trial which is at its fag end. The relevant provision of law, which would apply, is Section 20 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which the trial court has rightly applied.
Thus, I find no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. Hence, this petition and the application are dismissed.
(SUNIL GAUR)
Judge JULY 04, 2013 s
Protection of Children) Act, 2000 has rejected petitioner's application vide impugned order holding that instant case was pending when The
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 came into force and so, by virtue of Section 20 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2000, the proceedings before the criminal court, where the said case was pending, is to continue and after returning the findings, instead of passing any sentence, the juvenile accused is to be forwarded to the Juvenile Justice Board to pass an appropriate order under The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
Learned counsel for petitioner assails the impugned order on the ground that Section 7A of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2000 is mandatory and once petitioner has been found to be juvenile, then, proceedings before the criminal court ought not to continue and this case is to be straightaway sent to the Juvenile Justice
Board. In support of above submission, reliance has been placed on decisions in Ashwani Kumar Saxena v. State of M.P. 2012(9) SCALE;
Anil Aggarwal and Another v. State of West Bengal (2012) 9 SCC 768;
Amarchand Tiwari & Ors. v. State of M.P. 2012 Crl. L.J. 1028 and
Sameer K Shah v. State of Gujarat, Special Criminal Application No.452 of 2009 rendered on 29th April, 2010 by High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad.
The submissions advanced, case law cited and the impugned order have been duly considered and thereupon, it becomes evident that petitioner had filed the aforesaid application at the stage of defence evidence i.e. belatedly. Recourse to Section 20 of The Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 by the trial court is fully
CRL.REV.P. 133/2013 Page 3 justified particularly, when the application under Section 7 of The
Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (old Act) and Section 7A of The Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (new Act) has been filed at the fag end of the trial.
In the aforesaid background, reliance placed by petitioner on the afore-noted decisions is of no avail. Section 7A of The Juvenile Justice
(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 cannot be made to apply to a pending trial which is at its fag end. The relevant provision of law, which would apply, is Section 20 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which the trial court has rightly applied.
Thus, I find no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. Hence, this petition and the application are dismissed.
(SUNIL GAUR)
Judge JULY 04, 2013 s
JUDGMENT