Ajay v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
This appeal addressed the applicability of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 to an appellant convicted of murder and kidnapping. The High Court held that since the appellant was a minor at the time of the offence and below 18 when the 2000 Act commenced, the Act applies. The sentence was set aside, and the appellant was released.
What did the court decide?
The Order on Sentence dated 14.08.2002 is set aside. The Appellant is released, provided he is not required for any other matter or case.
What the court decided
$~41
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 09th SEPTEMBER, 2025
IN THE MATTER OF: + CRL.A. 921/2002 & CRL.M.A. 10184/2025 AJAY .....Appellant Through: Mr. Krishan Kumar and Mr. Shivam Bedi, Advocates versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for the State Inspector Praveen Kumar, PS Nangloi CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL KUMAR YADAV
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
- The instant Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 12.08.2002 and 14.08.2002, passed by learned ASJ, Delhi in SC No. 82/2000 arising out of the FIR No. 304/2000 registered at Police Station Nangloi. By the Order on Sentence dated 14.08.2002, the Appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 364 & 302 of the IPC, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs.5000/-, and in case of default in payment of fine, the Appellant has been further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 03
Signature Not Verified
CRL.A. 921/2002 Page 1 of 10
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 applies to an appellant who was a minor on the date of the offence and was below 18 years of age on the date the new Act came into force, despite the conviction
Whether the sentence passed under ordinary law against an appellant declared as a juvenile must be set aside.
Whether an appellant who has already spent more than the maximum prescribed punishment under the Juvenile Justice Act should be remitted for trial or released.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ajay
- respondent
State
Coram
Subramonium Prasad
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court