Dismissed

X(Minor) v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2023CRLR/2900/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision challenging the Juvenile Justice Board's order to transfer the case for trial as an adult, the Allahabad High Court examined the preliminary assessment. Focusing on the minor's demonstrated maturity and understanding of the offense, the court found the Board acted lawfully and dismissed the revision.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision filed by X(Minor) is dismissed; the order dated 26.3.2022 of the Juvenile Justice Board is upheld.

X(Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:141960

¶2

Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2900 of 2023 Revisionist :- X(Minor) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Sitaram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Birendra Kumar Arya

¶3

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for revisionist, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.

¶5

The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act-2015 (hereinafter referred to as "J.J. Act, 2015) to allow the present revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 26.3.2022 passed by learned Juvenile Justice Board, Azamgarh in Case No. 71 of 2020 (State Vs. Anoop) arising out of Case Crime No. 62 of 2020, under Section 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Tahbarpur, District Azamgarh by which the Board had made an order for trial of the child as an adult.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the age of the juvenile was 17 years, one month and two days as determined by the Board. Further submitted that by passing the order dated 26.3.2022 the learned Board transferred the case for trial before the Children's Court after making preliminary assessment which cannot be said to be lawful. Learned Board did not consider the juvenality of the delinquent and also his mental state but passed the order in violation of provisions as contained under Section 15 and 18 of the Act. In this way, the order passed by the learned Board cannot be said to be in conformity with the law, therefore, requested to set aside the order passed by the J.J. Board and allow the criminal revision.

¶7

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as A.G.A. opposed the aforesaid prayer and urged that learned Board made preliminary assessment as provided under Section 15 of the Act and then passed the order in accordance with provisions as

¶8

contained under Sub Section 3 of Section 18 of the Act, after getting adequate preliminary assessment about the physical and mental capacity of the child and referred the case to be tried by the Children's Court. Several questions were asked by the learned Board to the child which were answered by him deliberately suggesting maturity of understanding and after satisfying itself, the Board passed the order as aforesaid. There is no any illegality in the order passed by the learned Board, therefore, the present revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.

¶9

5. Section 15 of the Act,2015 provides as under:

¶10

" 15. Preliminary assessment into heinous offences by Board. —(1) In case of a heinous offence alleged to have been committed by a child, who has completed or is above the age of sixteen years, the Board shall conduct a preliminary assessment with regard to his mental and physical capacity to commit such offence, ability to understand the consequences of the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly committed the offence, and may pass an order in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 18:

¶11

Provided that for such an assessment, the Board may take the assistance of experienced psychologists or psycho-social workers or other experts.

¶12

Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, it is clarified that preliminary assessment is not a trial, but is to assess the capacity of such child to commit and understand the consequences of the alleged offence.

¶13

(2) Where the Board is satisfied on preliminary assessment that the matter should be disposed of by the Board, then the Board shall follow the procedure, as far as may be, for trial in summons case under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974):

¶14

Provided that the order of the Board to dispose of the matter shall be appealable under sub-section (2) of section 101:

¶15

Provided further that the assessment under this section shall be completed within the period specified in section 14."

¶16

Section 18 (3) of the Act,2015 provides as under:

¶17

"(3) Where the Board after preliminary assessment under section 15 pass an order that there is a need for trial of the said child as an adult, then the Board may order transfer of the trial of the case to the Children's Court having jurisdiction to try such offences."

¶18

On considering the fact and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perusal of record, it appears that the age of the juvenile was found seventeen years, one month and

¶19

two days at the time of determining juvenality vide order dated 21.11.2020 by the Board. On 26.3.2022 preliminary assessment was made by the learned Board in pursuance to the provisions as contained under Section 15 of the Act. Near about 23 questions were asked to the delinquent regarding several facts which he answered clearly. The answers given by him indicate the maturity of understanding and also capacity to understand the consequences of the offence. Lastly the child categorically answered in last question that he answered the questions on the basis of his own understanding. Order in question also shows that no any objection was raised on the part of the delinquent during the proceedings of preliminary assessment as a result learned Board passed the aforesaid order in accordance with the provisions as contained under Section 15 and Sub-Section 3 of Section 18 of the Act. There appears no any kind of illegality and impropriety in passing the order in question but this revision being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed.

¶20

8. Accordingly, this revision is hereby dismissed .

¶21

Order Date :- 18.7.2023 A. Singh

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

X(Minor) v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

X(Minor) v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Xx Vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile 'X' Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gyanendra Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Santosh Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abdul Rahman @ Dhondhu (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

X- Juvenile Vs State of U.P. and Another