Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 1006 (ALL)

LALLAN SINGH v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2001-11-06

U.S.TRIPATHI

body2001
U. S. TRIPATHI, J. ( 1 ) THIS revision has been directed against the order dated 30-10-2001, passed by the Sessions Judge, Chandauli in S. T. No 28 of 2001, holding accused Ram Singh, opposite party No. 2 as juvenile under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. ( 2 ) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant, learned A. G. A. and Sri Ashwani Mishra learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and perused the record. ( 3 ) THE opposite party No. 2 was facing trial in S. T. No. 28 of 2001, under Section 498-A, 304-B, and 201, IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. The occurrence took place on 18-6-1997. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions by the Magistrate prior to 30-12-2000 and the trial against the opposite party No. 2 was pending on 30-12-2000. Before the Sessions Judge the applicant moved an appliction for declaring him juvenile. The above application was opposed by the prosecution on the ground that the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000, hereinafter called the Act is not applicable to the present proceedings. ( 4 ) THE learned Sessions Judge held that the New Act received the assent of the President of India on Dec. 30, 2000 and was published in the Gazette Extra-Ordinary, dated Dec. 30, 2000, therefore, the commencement of the Act was from the said date i. e. 30-12-2000, when the case was pending against the opposite party No. 2 and, therefore, he is entitled to the benefit of new Act. Accordingly, he declared the applicant as juvenile under the new Act. ( 5 ) WITH the above order, the complainant of the case preferred this revision. ( 6 ) THE questions which are involved in this case are as to what was the date of commencement of the new Act and whether the provisions of new Act are applicable to the present case. ( 7 ) SECTION 1 of the new Act reads as under :- (1) This Act may be called the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children ) Act, 2000. (2) It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir. (3) It shall not come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. (2) It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir. (3) It shall not come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. ( 8 ) THE Central Government issued notification No. S. O. 177 (E), dated Feb. 28, 2001, notifying that the new Act will come into force on 1/04/2001. Thus it is clear that the learned Sessions Judge had wrongly held that the Act came into force on 30-12-2000 when it received assent of the President and was published in the Gazette of India dated Dec. 30, 2000. ( 9 ) IT is not disputed that the trial against the applicant was pending from before 30-12-2000, i. e. much prior to the date of enforcement of the new Act i. e 1-4-2001. Section 20 of the new Act, which deals with the special provisions in respect of the pending cases, reads as under :-"20 Special provision in respect of pending cases - Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, all proceedings in respect of a juvenile pending in any Court in any area on the date on which this Act comes into force in that area, shall be continued in that Court as if this Act had not been passed and if the Court finds that the juvenile has committed an offence, it shall record such finding and instead of passing any sentence in respect of the juvenile, forward the juvenile to the Board which shall pass orders in respect of that juvenile in accordance with the provisions of this Act as if it has been satisfied on inquiry under this Act that a juvenile has committed the offence. " ( 10 ) THE wording of the above section are clear enough to show that if any proceeding is pending on the date of enforcement of the new Act, that proceeding shall be concluded under the provisions of old Act. However, it provides that in case the Court finds that the accused was juvenile and he committed the offence, the Court shall record its finding, but shall not pass any sentence and send the juvenile to the Board for appropriate orders. The sending of juvenile before the Board would arise after conclusion of the trial and finding that the accused had committed the offence. The sending of juvenile before the Board would arise after conclusion of the trial and finding that the accused had committed the offence. But it is clear that except said procedure the provisions of new Act would not be applicable to the above proceedings. ( 11 ) THE learned Sessions Judge has also referred Section 64 of the new Act. The provisions of the above section applies to the juvenile in conflict with law who is undergoing any sentence of imprisonment on the commencement of the new Act. That situation or contingency has yet not arisen. Therefore, the provisions of Section 64 of the New Act are also not applicable to the present case. ( 12 ) IN these circumstances the learned Sessions Judge wrongly held that the provisions of new Act are applicable to the instant case. Therefore, the order under revision suffers from illegality and is without jurisdiction. ( 13 ) THE revision, is accordingly, allowed and the order under revision is hereby set aside. The learned Sessions Judge is directed to continue and deal with the case of opposite party No. 2 in accordance with law and to conclude the case as if the new Act has not been passed. Revision allowed. .