Disposed

Ajil I.a., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Jun 2019Bail Appl./2743/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that a 17-year-old accused, Ajil I.A., must be treated as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. Police lack power to arrest or remand him; the Juvenile Justice Board must handle the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to produce petitioner before Juvenile Justice Board for inquiry under Section 14 of J.J. Act, 2015; bail application to be considered by the Board.

Ajil I.a., Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 2743 of 2019

¶6

CRIME NO. 155/2019 OF Munambom Police Station , Ernakulam

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

AJIL I.A., AGED 17 YEARS S/O.NICY M.J., MALIYEKKAL HOUSE, CHERUVYPU, AYYAPILLY P.O., PIN - 682 501, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER NICY M.J.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN- 682 031.

¶12

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION, PIN- 683 515.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.06.2019, ALONG WITH Crl.MC.3626/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶17

PRESENT

¶18

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶19

TUESDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 14TH JYAISHTA, 1941

¶20

Crl.MC.No. 3626 of 2019

¶21

CRIME NO. 155/2019 OF Munambom Police Station , Ernakulam

¶22

PETITIONER/S:

¶23

AJIL.I.A AGED 17 YEARS S/O.NICY M.J., MALIYEKKAL HOUSE, CHERUVYPU, AYYAPPILLY.P.O, PIN-682501, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER NICY M.J

¶24

BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU

¶25

RESPONDENT/S:

¶26

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PIN-682031

¶27

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION, PIN- 683 515

¶28

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.06.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..2743/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶30

================== B.A.No. 2743/2019 & Crl.M.C.No. 3626/2019 ================== Dated this the 4^th day of June, 2019

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

The petitioner has been arrayed as the 2^nd accused in Crime No. 155/2019 of Munambam Police Station, registered for offences punishable under Secs.377, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C. The petitioner has asserted that his date of birth is 25.2.2002 and that he would complete the age of majority of 18 years only on 25.2.2020 as evident from Anx. A-3 SSLC certificate and that even if it is alleged that the entire incidents in the above crime are true, the petitioner's case cannot be dealt with as if he is an accused, who is regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure and that the petitioner's case has to be dealt with strictly in terms of the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (J.J Act, 2015) as he is juvenile in conflict with law as conceived in the said Act and therefore, the Police authorities have no competence or power whatsoever to order his arrest and remand in judicial custody to jail, etc.

¶33

The learned Prosecutor was earlier requested to get specific instructions as to correctness of the date of birth of the

¶34

B.A.No.2743/2019 & Crl.M.C.3626/19 - : 4 :-

¶35

petitioner as shown in Anx. A-3 certificate. Today when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Prosecutor submits on the basis of the instructions of the investigating officer that now it has been revealed that the petitioner's date of birth is 25.2.2002 as discernible from Anx. A-3. Since that is an indisputable factual position, it is only to be held that the competent authorities concerned can deal with the petitioner only in terms of the provisions contained in the J.J. Act, as even going by the prosecution case, he can be treated only as a juvenile in conflict with law as conceived in

¶36

the J.J. Act and therefore the petitioner's case should be dealt with by

¶37

the competent authorities strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in Sec. 14 of the J.J. Act. Sec. 14 of the said Act provides as follows:

¶38

“Sec. 14: Inquiry by Board regarding child in conflict with law.--

¶39

(1) Where a child alleged to be in conflict with law is produced before Board, the Board shall hold an inquiry in accordance with the provisions of this Act and may pass such orders in relation to such child as it deems fit under Sections 17 and 18 of this Act.

¶40

(2) The inquiry under this Section shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of first production of the child before the Board, unless the period is extended, for a maximum period of two more months by the Board, having regard to the circumstances of the case and after recording the reasons in writing for such extension.

¶41

(3) A preliminary assessment in case of heinous offences under Section 15 shall be disposed of by the Board within a period of three months from the date of first production of the child before the Board.

¶42

(4) If inquiry by the Board under sub-section (2) for petty offences remains inconclusive even after the extended period, the proceedings shall stand terminated:

¶43

B.A.No.2743/2019 & Crl.M.C.3626/19

¶44

: 5 :-

¶45

Provided that for serious or heinous offences, in case the Board requires further extension of time for completion of inquiry, the same shall be granted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate or, as the case may be, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, for reasons to be recorded in writing.

¶46

(5) The Board shall take the following steps to ensure fair and speedy inquiry, namely:--

¶47

(a) at the time of initiating the inquiry, the Board shall satisfy itself that the child in conflict with law has not been subjected to any ill-treatment by the police or by any other person, including a lawyer or Probation Officer and take corrective steps in case of such illtreatment;

¶48

(b) in all cases under the Act, the proceedings shall be conducted in simple manner as possible and care shall be taken to ensure that the child, against whom the proceedings have been instituted, is given child-friendly atmosphere during the proceedings;

¶49

(c) every child brought before the Board shall be given the opportunity of being heard and participate in the inquiry;

¶50

(d) cases of petty offences, shall be disposed of by the Board through summary proceedings, as per the procedure prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974);

¶51

(e) inquiry of serious offences shall be disposed of by the Board, by following the procedure, for trial in summons cases under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974);

¶52

(f) inquiry of heinous offences,--

¶53

(i) for child below the age of sixteen years as on the date of commission of an offence shall be disposed of by the Board under Clause (e);

¶54

(ii) for child above the age of sixteen years as on the date of commission of an offence shall be dealt with in the manner prescribed under Section 15.”

¶55

Further Sec.8(2) of the J.J. Act specifically mandates that

¶56

the powers conferred on the Juvenile Justice Board by or under

¶57

the said Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Children's Court, when the proceedings come before them under

¶58

Sec. 19 or in appeal, revision or otherwise.

¶59

Accordingly, it is ordered that it is for the competent Police authorities concerned to immediately produce the

¶60

petitioner before the competent Juvenile Justice Board

¶61

B.A.No.2743/2019 & Crl.M.C.3626/19

¶62

: 6 :-

¶63

concerned in this crime and thereupon, the petitioner's application for grant of bail should be considered by the said Juvenile Justice Board, in accordance with the provisions contained in Sec.14 of the J.J.Act. Needless to say, the competent authorities are obliged in law to treat the case of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the provisions contained in the J.J.Act.

¶64

With these observations and directions, the bail application and the Crl.M.C. will stand finally disposed of.

¶65

sdk+

¶66

Sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶67

B.A.No.2743/2019 & Crl.M.C.3626/19

¶68

: 7 :-

¶69

APPENDIX OF B.A.NO.2743/2019

¶70

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶71

ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.155 OF 2019 DATED 16.02.2019 OF MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION. ANNEXURE A2 THE STATEMENT OF THE VICTIM RECORDED BY THE POLICE OFFICER DATED 16.02.2019 ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE

¶72

B.A.No.2743/2019 & Crl.M.C.3626/19

¶73

: 8 :-

¶74

APPENDIX OF Crl.MC 3626/2019

¶75

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶76

ANNEXURE A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR NO.155 OF 2019 DATED 16.02.2019 OF MUNAMBAM POLICE STATION.

¶77

ANNEXURE A2 THE STATEMENT OF THE VICTIM RECORDED BY THE POLICE OFFICER DATED 16.02.2019 ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE

Ajil I.a., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajil I.a., v. State of Kerala

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

Shereef Sahadi Eniyadi Vs the State of Kerala

Shakkir Ummar, Vs Station House Officer

Saheer a.P., Vs Rafseena M.

T.S.Raju, Vs Balamani

Pranav Vs State of Kerala

P.Vidhyadharan Vs State of Kerala