Plea Of Juvenility Could Be Raised Before Appellate Court During Pendency Of Appeal: Patna High Court

The High Court was considering a criminal appeal preferred by the Appellants against the impugned order of conviction whereby all the appellants were found guilty under Sections 307, 148, 149 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 years under Sections 307 and 326 each of the Indian Penal Code and 2 years under Sections 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Single Bench of Justice Jitendra Kumar stated, “Even the judicial precedents as pronounced by Hon’ble Apex Court on the subject, clearly hold that the plea of juvenility could be raised at any stage before any Court. In other words, the plea of juvenility could be raised before the Appellate Court during pendency of the appeal.”

Advocate Dewendra Narayan Singh represented the Appellant, while APP Abhay Kumar represented the State.

Arguments

The appellant had raised a plea of juvenility for the first time through an Interlocutory Application. He had annexed a copy of his Matriculation Certificate, issued by the Bihar School Examination Board, along with the application, as per which, his date of birth was shown as June 15, 1975, and accordingly, his age on the date of occurrence i.e. on June 1, 1993, was 17 years 11 months and 15 days. He further submitted that, for want of knowledge and proper advice, he could not raise his plea of juvenility during the trial before the Trial Court.

The APP for the State opposed the prayer of the Appellant, submitting that on the date of the alleged occurrence, the appellant was above 16 years of age and as per the J.J. Act, 1986, which was in operation on the date of occurrence, he was not a juvenile.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that at the time of the alleged occurrence, the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 was in operation. Hence, the Appellant was governed by the Act of 1986. However, the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, was repealed by the Juvenile Justice Act of 2000, which came into effect from April 1, 2001. It was also explained by the Bench that as per Section 25 of the Act of 2015, notwithstanding anything contained in the Act of 2015, all the proceedings in respect of a child alleged or found to be in conflict with law pending before any Board or Court on the date of commencement of this Act are required to be continued in that Board or Court as if the Act of 2015 had not been enacted.

The Bench made it clear that Juvenile Justice Act of 2000 was applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. It was noted that as per Section 2(k) and 2(l) of the Act of 2000, a juvenile in conflict with law means a juvenile who is alleged to have committed an offence and has not completed 18 years of age on the date of commission of such offence. “As such, as per the claim, the Appellant is juvenile in the terms of Act of 2000, because he is 17 years 04 months and 08 days old on the alleged date of occurrence and hence, he is entitled to all benefits and protections as provided in the Act of 2000, if the Appellant is found to be juvenile after inquiry”, it said.

The Bench also observed that as per Section 7A of the Act of 2000, the claim of juvenility may be raised before any Court at any stage of the proceeding and such claim is required to be determined in terms of the provisions of the Act of 2000 and rules made thereunder, even if the juvenile has ceased to be so on or before the date of commencement of this Act on April 1, 2001. “Even the judicial precedents as pronounced by Hon’ble Apex Court on the subject, clearly hold that the plea of juvenility could be raised at any stage before any Court. In other words, the plea of juvenility could be raised before the Appellate Court during pendency of the appeal”, it added.

The appellant’s age on the date of occurrence came to 17 years, 11 months and 15 days. “As such, prima facie it appears that the Appellant No.8 is below 18 years of age and hence, inquiry into his juvenility is imperative before I proceed in this appeal”, the Bench held while allowing the appellant. The Court also directed the J.J. Board to conduct an enquiry regarding the juvenility of the Appellant and send his report within 3 months.

Cause Title: Shiv Jee Singh v. The State Of Bihar (Case No.: Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.67 of 2018)

Appearance

Appellant: Advocate Dewendra Narayan Singh

Respondent: APP Abhay Kumar

Click here to read/download Order