Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Calcutta High Court held that although the JJB conducted a preliminary assessment, it did not adequately assess the Juvenile’s mental and physical capacity to commit the offense.
“The preliminary assessment is not a trial or just a simple routine task, but an exercise to assess the child’s capacity to commit and understand the consequences of the alleged crime. It decides the fate of the child in conflict with the law”.
“JJ Board and the Children’s Court to conduct the preliminary assessment into heinous offences in a very meticulous way with the psychological evaluation, taking the assistance of experienced psychologist and medical specialist”.
“Continuance of the criminal proceedings against the accused without any acceptable evidence would be a travesty of justice and an abuse of the process of the Court”.
A chargesheet was filed against the Juvenile Delinquent for offences under Sections 363, 366-A, 368, 376 of the IPC and Section 3, 4, 16 and 17 of the JJ Act.
A Child-in-conflict with law (CIL) was granted bail considering that she was a young girl; her family was poor; she had less understanding to distinguish between right and wrong and her family atmosphere was good. The Court also discussed situations in which a CIL could be denied bail even in bailable offences as per Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
“A child with average intelligence/IQ will have the intellectual knowledge of the consequences of his actions. But whether or not he is able to control himself or his actions will depend on his level of emotional competence.”
Karnataka High Court: Krishna S. Dixit J. disposed off the petition and remarked “there is & shall be no cause of action
Supreme Court: In a bid to clear the air over the applicability of and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)