Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1288 (HP)

Anil Kumar @ Ballu v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2019-09-03

SANDEEP SHARMA

body2019
JUDGMENT : Sandeep Sharma, J. Both the above captioned Criminal Revision Petitions, lay challenge to judgment dated 30.7.2015, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No.1/2014, affirming the judgment of conviction recorded by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Inquiry No.4/2011, whereby petitioner namely, Anil Kumar @ Ballu (hereinafter referred to as Juvenile in conflict with law), who has filed Criminal Revision No.365 of 2015 has been convicted and ordered to be sent to Special Home for a period of one year for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(f) and 201 of IPC. 2. By way of Criminal Revision Petition No.365 of 2015, Juvenile in conflict with law namely, Anil Kumar has sought acquittal after setting aside the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned Courts below, whereas State of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Revision No.290 of 2016 has prayed for enhancement of sentence awarded by the learned Courts below while holding Juvenile in conflict with law guilty of having committed the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(f) and 201 of IPC. 3. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record vis-a-vis reasoning assigned by learned Courts below while passing the impugned judgments, this Court finds no reason at this stage to determine the correctness and genuineness of the judgment impugned before it because by now both the petitions have become infructuous. Admittedly, vide judgment dated 31.12.2013 learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Una, District Una, H.P. while holding Juvenile in conflict with law guilty of having committed the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(f) of IPC, sent him to Special Home for a period of one year, but now since Juvenile in conflict with law has attained majority, he cannot be sent to Special Home for a period of one year in terms of the judgment passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board. Juvenile Justice Board while awarding sentence under Section 15(g) of the Act, has categorically observed that juvenile shall not suffer disqualification on account of the conviction in view of Section 19 of the Juvenile Justice Act. 4. Juvenile Justice Board while awarding sentence under Section 15(g) of the Act, has categorically observed that juvenile shall not suffer disqualification on account of the conviction in view of Section 19 of the Juvenile Justice Act. 4. As far as criminal petition filed by the respondent/State is concerned, whereby they have prayed for enhancement, same has also rendered infructuous for the reason that maximum punishment as per Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which was applicable at the time of alleged incident, specifically provides provision of sending the Juvenile in conflict with law to Special Home for a period of three years. Though, in the instant case, this Court has not made an attempt to ascertain the correctness of the judgment of conviction recorded by the court below on its own merit, but even otherwise for the sake of arguments, if it is presumed that in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, Juvenile in conflict with law ought to have been awarded maximum punishment of three years as provided under Section 15(1)(g) of the Act, same cannot be awarded at this stage when Juvenile in conflict with law has attained majority. 5. 5. Otherwise also, Section 15(1) of the Act provides that where a Board is satisfied on inquiry that a juvenile has committed an offence, then, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Board may, if it so thinks fit can award any of the following punishment:- (a) allow the juvenile to go home after advice or admonition following appropriate inquiry against and counselling to the parent or the guardian and the juvenile; (b) direct the juvenile to participate in group counselling and similar activities; (c) order the juvenile to perform community service; (d) order the parent of the juvenile or the juvenile himself to pay a fine, if he is over fourteen years of age and earns money; (e) direct the juvenile to be released on probation of good conduct and placed under the care of any parent, guardian or other fit person, on such parent, guardian or other fit person executing a bond, with or without surety, as the Board may require, for the good behaviour and well-being of the juvenile for any period not exceeding three years; (f) direct the juvenile to be released on probation of good conduct and placed under the care of any fit institution for the good behaviour and wellbeing of the juvenile for any period not exceeding three years; (g) make an order directing the juvenile to be sent to a special home for a period of three years: Provided that the Board may, if it is satisfied that having regard to the nature of the offence and the circumstances of the case, it is expedient so to do, for reasons to be recorded, reduce the period of stay to such period as it thinks fit. 6. Section 15(1)(g) of the Act though provides for sending the Juvenile in conflict with law to Special Home for a period of three years, but proviso to this section further provides that such period can be reduced by the Board taking note of nature of the offence and circumstances of the case and as such, it cannot be said that in any eventuality period of three years, as prescribed under Section 15(f) of the Act, cannot be reduced by the Court. 7. Consequently, in view of the above, both the criminal petitions are disposed of as having rendered infructuous with the efflux of time. 7. Consequently, in view of the above, both the criminal petitions are disposed of as having rendered infructuous with the efflux of time. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. JUDGMENT : Sandeep Sharma, J. Both the above captioned Criminal Revision Petitions, lay challenge to judgment dated 30.7.2015, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No.1/2014, affirming the judgment of conviction recorded by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, in Criminal Inquiry No.4/2011, whereby petitioner namely, Anil Kumar @ Ballu (hereinafter referred to as Juvenile in conflict with law), who has filed Criminal Revision No.365 of 2015 has been convicted and ordered to be sent to Special Home for a period of one year for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(f) and 201 of IPC. 2. By way of Criminal Revision Petition No.365 of 2015, Juvenile in conflict with law namely, Anil Kumar has sought acquittal after setting aside the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned Courts below, whereas State of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Revision No.290 of 2016 has prayed for enhancement of sentence awarded by the learned Courts below while holding Juvenile in conflict with law guilty of having committed the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(f) and 201 of IPC. 3. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record vis-a-vis reasoning assigned by learned Courts below while passing the impugned judgments, this Court finds no reason at this stage to determine the correctness and genuineness of the judgment impugned before it because by now both the petitions have become infructuous. Admittedly, vide judgment dated 31.12.2013 learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Una, District Una, H.P. while holding Juvenile in conflict with law guilty of having committed the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(f) of IPC, sent him to Special Home for a period of one year, but now since Juvenile in conflict with law has attained majority, he cannot be sent to Special Home for a period of one year in terms of the judgment passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board. Juvenile Justice Board while awarding sentence under Section 15(g) of the Act, has categorically observed that juvenile shall not suffer disqualification on account of the conviction in view of Section 19 of the Juvenile Justice Act. 4. Juvenile Justice Board while awarding sentence under Section 15(g) of the Act, has categorically observed that juvenile shall not suffer disqualification on account of the conviction in view of Section 19 of the Juvenile Justice Act. 4. As far as criminal petition filed by the respondent/State is concerned, whereby they have prayed for enhancement, same has also rendered infructuous for the reason that maximum punishment as per Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which was applicable at the time of alleged incident, specifically provides provision of sending the Juvenile in conflict with law to Special Home for a period of three years. Though, in the instant case, this Court has not made an attempt to ascertain the correctness of the judgment of conviction recorded by the court below on its own merit, but even otherwise for the sake of arguments, if it is presumed that in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, Juvenile in conflict with law ought to have been awarded maximum punishment of three years as provided under Section 15(1)(g) of the Act, same cannot be awarded at this stage when Juvenile in conflict with law has attained majority. 5. 5. Otherwise also, Section 15(1) of the Act provides that where a Board is satisfied on inquiry that a juvenile has committed an offence, then, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Board may, if it so thinks fit can award any of the following punishment:- (a) allow the juvenile to go home after advice or admonition following appropriate inquiry against and counselling to the parent or the guardian and the juvenile; (b) direct the juvenile to participate in group counselling and similar activities; (c) order the juvenile to perform community service; (d) order the parent of the juvenile or the juvenile himself to pay a fine, if he is over fourteen years of age and earns money; (e) direct the juvenile to be released on probation of good conduct and placed under the care of any parent, guardian or other fit person, on such parent, guardian or other fit person executing a bond, with or without surety, as the Board may require, for the good behaviour and well-being of the juvenile for any period not exceeding three years; (f) direct the juvenile to be released on probation of good conduct and placed under the care of any fit institution for the good behaviour and wellbeing of the juvenile for any period not exceeding three years; (g) make an order directing the juvenile to be sent to a special home for a period of three years: Provided that the Board may, if it is satisfied that having regard to the nature of the offence and the circumstances of the case, it is expedient so to do, for reasons to be recorded, reduce the period of stay to such period as it thinks fit. 6. Section 15(1)(g) of the Act though provides for sending the Juvenile in conflict with law to Special Home for a period of three years, but proviso to this section further provides that such period can be reduced by the Board taking note of nature of the offence and circumstances of the case and as such, it cannot be said that in any eventuality period of three years, as prescribed under Section 15(f) of the Act, cannot be reduced by the Court. 7. Consequently, in view of the above, both the criminal petitions are disposed of as having rendered infructuous with the efflux of time. 7. Consequently, in view of the above, both the criminal petitions are disposed of as having rendered infructuous with the efflux of time. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.