Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs. the State of Rajasthan

criminal procedure code - section 432 and penal code--section 420--magistrate taking cognizance of offence under section 420 on police report filed under section 173--order of magistrate modified with consent of parties.;application disposed of accordingly - section 2(k), 2(1), 7 & 40 & juvenile justice (care and protection of children) rules, 2007, rule 12 & 98 & juvenile justice act, 1986, section 2(h): [altamas kabir & cyriac joseph, jj] determination as to juvenile - appellant was found to have completed the age of 16 years and 13 days on the date of alleged occurrence - appellant was arrested on 30.11.1998 when the 1986 act was in force and under clause (h) of section 2 a juvenile was described to mean a child who had not attained the age of sixteen years or a girl who had not attained the age of eighteen years - it is with the enactment of the juvenile justice act, 2000, that in section 2(k) a juvenile or child was defined to mean a child who had not completed eighteen years of a ge which was given prospective prospect - appellant was about sixteen years of age on the date of commission of the alleged offence and had not completed eighteen years of age when the juvenile justice act, 2000, came into force - juvenile act, of 2000 has been given retrospective effect by rule 12 of juvenile justice rule, 2007 - as such, accused has to be treated as juvenile under the said act. .....application for revision from the aforementioned order was dismissed by the learned sessions judge vide order dated, august 30,1980.3. learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out what he described as certain glaring illeglities in the order passed by the learned magistrate and the order of affirmance passed by the learned sessions judge. no useful purpose will be served by going into all these matters in this case. the petitioners' grievance can, in my opinion, be redressed even on the assumption that the impuged order passed by the learned magistrate taking cognizance is correct. i am passing the following order with the consent of the parties for compliance by the learned magistrate :(i) the petitioners shall enter personal appearance in the court of judicial magistrate bbaratpur on september 22,1980.(ii) the petitioners shall be released by the learned magistrate on their respectively executing recognizance in the ancount of rs. 10,000/ for their appearance in the court of lea rned magistrate on future date or dates of hearing.(iii) the learned magistrate shall hear arguments of the parties on september 22,1980, itself, as to the question whether or not there is material enough on the record to justify the framing of the charge against the petitioners.(iv) if for one reason or the other the learned magistrate is not able to hear the arguments and decide the question of charge that day, it will be open to the petitioners to make an application to the learned magistrate seeking exemption from personal appearance in the court on the adjourned date or dates of hearings. such application shall be decided by the learned magistrate acccrding to law.(v) needless to say that the learned magistrate will not be influenced by any observation of this court or of the learned sessions judge while deciding for himself as to whether or not the case is deserving of the framing of charge.(vi) the operation of the warrant of arrest issued by the learned magistrate.....