Bombay High Court: In a writ petition under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act), the Division Bench of Shree Chandrashekhar, CJ., and Gautam A. Ankhad, J., held that the plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage of the proceedings and that delay in raising such a claim cannot justify rejection. The Court noted that the petitioner had sought an inquiry before the Juvenile Justice Board (JJ Board), but the Special Judge had dismissed the application, restricting the JJ Board powers to Section 19, JJ Act. Referring to Umesh Singh v. State of Bihar, (2013) 4 SCC 360 and Abuzar Hossain v. State of W.B., (2012) 10 SCC 489, the Court found the rejection contrary to settled law, set aside the order dated 6 February 2026, and directed transmission of records to the JJ Board for inquiry by 7 March 2026, thereby disposing of the writ petition.
Background
The petitioner had filed an application before the Special Judge seeking to decline the remand sought by the prosecution for want of jurisdiction, a direction that the first alleged incident be placed before the JJ Board under Sections 9 and 10, JJ Act, and a declaration that the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 provisions were not attracted to the last alleged incident.
The Special Judge rejected the application, reasoning that the JJ Board could exercise its powers only in proceedings under Section 19, JJ Act and further relied on the investigating officer’s statement that he would verify the date of birth of the accused.
However, in the writ petition, the petitioner contended that the plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage of proceedings, while the prosecution argued that the rejection was proper.
Analysis and Decision
The Court emphasised that in Umesh Singh (supra), the Supreme Court had clearly held that the plea of juvenility can be raised at any stage of the proceedings, even if not previously raised in the trial or before the High Court. Further, while referring to Abuzar Hossain (supra), it was observed that the plea of juvenility can be raised for the first time before the Supreme Court as well, even after the final disposal of the case, and the delay in raising the claim of juvenility cannot be a ground for rejection of such claim. It was also noted that the claim of juvenility can be raised in appeal even if not pressed before the trial court and can be raised for the first time before the Supreme Court though not pressed before the trial court and in the appeal court.
The Court highlighted that in Abuzar Hossain (supra), the Supreme Court held that the court where the plea of juvenility is raised for the first time should always be guided by the objectives of the JJ Act and be alive to the position that the beneficent and salutary provisions contained in the JJ Act are not defeated by a hyper-technical approach, and that persons who are entitled to get benefits of the JJ Act should get such benefits. Further, the courts should not be unnecessarily influenced by any general impression that in schools the parents or guardians understate the age of their wards by one or two years for future benefits, or that age determination by medical examination is not very precise, and the matter should be considered prima facie on the touchstone of preponderance of probability.
The Court observed that the petitioner, having raised the plea of juvenility and sought an inquiry under the JJ Act, was entitled to have such an inquiry conducted, and highlighted that the rejection by the Special Judge (POCSO) was contrary to the settled position of law.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the relevant portion of the order dated 6 February 2026 and directed the Court concerned to transmit the records to the JJ Board for an inquiry under the JJ Act.
The Court thus ordered that action be taken by 7 March 2026 and disposed of the writ petition.
[Sheraz Ahmed v. State of Maharashtra, 2026 SCC OnLine Bom 1754, decided on 25-2-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Sujit Sahoo with Sharad Goswami, Reeta Sharma & Zainab Burmawala, Advocates
For the Respondents: S. V. Gavand, APP
Buy Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 HERE
Buy Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 HERE
