Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1998CriLJ4249
V.S. Agga Rwal, J.1. This is an appeal filed by Sunita (hereinafter described as 'the appellant') directed against the judgment and the order of sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chandigarh dated 19-9-1994. The learned trial Court held the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. In default of payment of fine, she was to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. 2. The appellant had been tried for having committed the murder of Sarla by sprinkling kerosene on her and then setting her on fire on 16-12-1989 at 11.00 a.m. in her house in Bapu Dham Colony, Union Territory, Chandigarh. Sarla had died after making a dying declaration. After investigation and collecting all other evidence, report under section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure was submitted. The learned trial Court as referred to above, held the appellant guilty of the said o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 131(2006)DLT663; 2006(91)DRJ719
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that this Revision petition has been filed inasmuch as the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 26.5.2005 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board dismissing the petitioner's application of 12.5.2005 requesting for holding a full fledged inquiry with regard to the age of the accused Hasan Ali in accordance with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, (hereinafter referred to as the said Act.)2. The facts leading to the filing of the present revision petition are that prior to the committal of the case by the Metropolitan Magistrate to the Sessions Court, on 13.2.2004 the Metropolitan Magistrate recorded the age of accused Hasan Ali as given by him to be 17 years. However, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate observed that from his appearance he did not appear less than 18 years of age. It was noted in the said order that the accused had stated that he did not go to schoo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Reported in : 1995CriLJ330
Sreedharan, J. 1. This reference is made by the learned Sessions Judge, Kalpetta. In a Sessions Case before him, a juvenile, aged below 15 years, stands charged with offences punishable under Sections 450, 376 and 506(ii) of the Penal Code and also under Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, hereinafter referred to as 'the 1989 Act'. The question referred is whether the said Juvenile is to be tried by a Sessions Court or by the Court established under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, hereinafter referred to as 'the 1986 Act'.2. The allegation made by the prosecution against the juvenile, who has been brought to Court as the accused, is that on 8-1 -1993 at about 5.00 P.M. he criminally trespassed into the house of one Sandhya, aged 14 years, who is a member of the Scheduled Tribe, threatened her with death and then committed rape on her.3. Since the accused brought before the Sessions Court is aged only 15 years, he is a 'ju...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1992CriLJ1335; 1991(2)WLN398
ORDERN.L. Tibrewal, J.1. The petitioner has filed this bail application Under Section 439, Cr. P.C. for his release in criminal case FIR No. 196/1991.The accusation against the petitioner is that Charas weighing 7 grms. and 500 Ml. grms. were recovered from his possession on Sept. 12, 1991. A report of the incided was lodged at P.S. Kunhadi-Kota by Sh. Mohan Singh, S.H.O. On the said report, Crime No. 196/91 Under Section 8/20 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1988 was registered. In the report, the age of the petitioner has been given as 17 years.2. The petitioner moved an application for grant of his bail under Section 439, Cr. P.C. before the Sessions Judge, Kota, but his application was rejected on the ground that as per medical report, the age of the petitioner is between 14 to 15 years, as such, he is a child within the definition of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), as such, the order of bail cannot be passed by any Court constituted under the Code of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 1994CriLJ2750; 1994(1)WLC487; 1994(1)WLN215
ORDERN.L. Tibrewal, J.1. Two important question have been raised, for determination, in this petition. The first question relates to the procedure to be followed when there is a dispute about the age of the accused to decide whether he is a juvenile or not, and the second related question is about the competency of the court to determine the age of the accused, for that purpose.2. In brief, the facts of the case are that Crime No. 5/93 was registered at Police Station, Sadar-Fatehpur Shekhawati under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 341, IPC on the basis of Parcha-Bayan' of the injured-Shishupal Singh, who was admitted in Government Dhanuka Hospital. The Station House Officer had reached at the hospital on getting information that one person by name Shishupal Singh was admitted there with profuse bleeding and it was a medico-legal case. In his statement, Shishupal Singh gave out that he and his brother Mangej Singh were assualted with knife by the accused-persons and Mangej Singh has di...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 1991CriLJ2269
Mishra, J.1. Lakshmi, the detenu's mother, has moved this Court for a writ in the nature of habeas corpus alleging that her son Murugan, aged 15 years, has been illegally detained by the respondent. It appears that one Venkatesan of Thuvariman Agraharam made a complaint to the respondent Sub-Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station, Madurai South, that while he and his wife were away therefrom. Someone entered into the house through the ventilator and committed theft of cash and jewels. Petitioner's son Murugan was taken in custody on suspicion in connection with the said case on 8-2-1991 by the respondent who, according to the petitioner, told her that he would send back her son immediately after interrogation. She has, however, alleged that she and her husband waited till the next morning but the boy (their son) did not return. So they went to the police station where they saw Murugan in custody. The respondent told them that the investigation of the case was not yet ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh Gwalior
(1) This revision petition under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000, read with Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, has been preferred against an order dated 16 th March 2011 in Criminal Case No. 25/2011 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge Guna, holding after conducting an inquiry that the petitioners are not juveniles. (2) The facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are that on 6 th December 2011 at Town of Raghogarh, District Guna, one Deepak Soni, s/o Babulal Soni was reported to be missing from his house. Said report was recorded in Rojnamcha of the police Station. During search on 8/12/10, the dead body of Deepak Soni in a gunny beg was found under beneath of culvert of ITI at Raghogarh. Accordingly, Marg report was registered. During inquiry, it appeared that the accused including petitioners committed murder of missing Deepak Soni and caused the evidence of offence to be disappeared with an intent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1995(71)FLR768]
B.N. Srikrishna, J. 1. This writ petition raises and interesting question of law as to whether a person who was a minor on the date when an alleged offence under Section 48(1) of the Maharashtra recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was committed, can be tried by the Labour Court under the provisions of the Act. 2. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner challenges an order dated 28th September, 1993 made by the Presiding Officer, 2nd Labour Court, Thane, who dismissed her application for deleting her name from the proceedings before it. 3. The petitioner is the daughter of 3rd Respondent and was born on 12th September, 1974. At the material time, she was still a minor studying in the high school. Though she was a manor, she and her father were Proprietors of a Powerloom business in Bhiwandi. The 1st respondent filed Complaint (ULP) No. 163 of 1992 before the In...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2010CriLJ655
B. Chandra Kumar, J.1. This Revision Case has been filed by A-1 to A-3 against the Judgment, dated 22- 03-2004 in Crl.A. No. 24 of 2001 passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa at Proddatur, whereby the Appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the I Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate in C.C. No. 108 of 2000, dated 25-01-2001.2. Originally the case was filed against A-1 to A-6. A-1 and A-3 were convicted for the offence under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month. A-2 was convicted for the offence under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. A-2 was also convicted for the offence under Section 326 of IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1993(2)ALT(Cri)20; 1994CriLJ1491
ORDERJ.P. Semwal, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 12-6-1991, passed by the Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, rejecting the application (88 kha) of the accused-applicant,2. The accused applicant and one Raju moved an application 88 kha, on 12-6-1991, before the lower court, praying that their trial be separated from other co-accused and be transferred to the Juvenile Court in accordance with law. It was also prayed that suitable orders be passed for holding an enquiry by the Chief Judicial Magistrate or by the said court itself as contemplated under Section 5, read with Section 20/32 of the Juvenile Justice Act. Affidavit and papers in support of proof in regard to age, were also filed. Authorities were cited on behalf of the revisionist before the lower court. The lower court considered the authorities cited on behalf of the revisionist and came to the conclusion that there was no question of separating the case or holding an enquiry, because when in de...
Tag this Judgment!