Remanded

Hari Prasad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Aug 2016CRA/872/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh, in Criminal Appeal No. 872 of 2004, held that the appellant was a juvenile on the date of the offence. Following Supreme Court and High Court precedents, the Court transferred the case to the Juvenile Justice Board, Bilaspur to determine the appropriate sentence considering the appellant's juvenile status and custody period.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Appeal transferred to the Juvenile Justice Board, Bilaspur, for appropriate orders.

Hari Prasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Custody and Guardianship | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 872 OF 2004

¶5

Hariprasad S/o Ramcharan Satnami, aged 19 years, present age 23 years, R/o Village Pendri Talab, P.S. Lalpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶6

… Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, through Police Station Lalpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶9

… Respondent

¶10

For Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Jain, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Mr. O.P. Sahu, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy

¶12

Judgment on Board

¶13

16/08/2016

¶14

1 . On 25.4.2016, this Court had directed the District Judge, Bilaspur to obtain a report so far as the juvenility of the Appellant is concerned from the Court at Mungeli. The Additional Sessions Judge, Mungeli on 30.6.2016 has submitted a report wherein the age of the Appellant on the date of incident which is 21.11.1998 is said to be 16 years, 4 months and 18 days. That is to say that the Appellant on the date of incident and in the light of the amended provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, (for brevity, 'the Act of 2000') was a minor.

¶15

2. The issue involved in the case stands squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in the case of Amit Singh Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another , 2011 (13) SCC 744 , wherein the facts of the case were also somewhat similar. The Supreme Court in the said decision has held that even if the juvenile crosses the age of juvenility during the course of a trial or subsequently but if on the date of

¶16

-2-

¶17

commission of offence his/her age was less than 18 years, he/she would be treated as a juvenile and the matter then under the provisions of Section 7-A of the Act of 2000 shall have to be sent before the Juvenile Justice Board for passing of appropriate orders in this regard.

¶18

3 . It is trite at this juncture to also refer to a judgment of the Division Bench of this High Court in Criminal Misc. Petition No. 101 of 2014 (Dinesh Jaiswal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh) wherein the Division Bench on 2.3.2016 while deciding the case had again in a somewhat similar set of facts taking into consideration the provisions of Section 7-A of the Act of 2000 sent the matter back to the Juvenile Justice Board for passing appropriate orders with regard to the sentence to be imposed upon the accused.

¶19

4. In the instant case, according to the Counsel for the Appellant, the total period of custody which the Appellant has undergone is only 3 months and 28 days. Whereas, the Juvenile Justice Board can sentence the juvenile to the maximum period of 3 years. Therefore, the matter is sent to the Juvenile Justice Board, Bilaspur, who, in turn, shall take into consideration the total facts and circumstances of the case and pass an appropriate order on the merits of the case.

¶20

5 . Let the records of the case be forwarded forthwith to the concerned Juvenile Justice Board.

¶21

6 . With the aforesaid observations, the criminal appeal stands transferred to the Juvenile Justice Board, Bilaspur.

¶22

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy)

¶23

/sharad/ Judge

Hari Prasad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Prasad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhikham Chowdhry Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Saddam Khatri Vs Chola Mandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Om Prakash Sahu Vs Shatrughan Baghel

Shushil Kumar Mittal Vs Nitash Agrawal

Satish Singh Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Haldhar @ Lamboo Yadav and Ors.