{"id":236905,"date":"2020-10-08T09:00:28","date_gmt":"2020-10-08T03:30:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=236905"},"modified":"2020-10-09T10:45:30","modified_gmt":"2020-10-09T05:15:30","slug":"an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/","title":{"rendered":"An offence committed by a &#8216;juvenile&#8217; in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court<\/strong>: In a bid to clear the air over the applicability of and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 in a case where the accused had committed an offence in the year 1981 and had pleaded juvenility, the bench of SA Nazeer and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ elaborately discussed the schemes of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, the Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2000 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and concluded that<\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>all proceedings in respect of a juvenile pending in any court on the date on which the 2000 Act came into force shall continue before that court as if the 2000 Act had not been passed; and<\/li>\n<li>2000 Act would continue to apply and govern the proceedings which were pending when the 2015 Act was enforced.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>BACKGROUND OF THE CASE<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The accused was sentenced to life imprisonment for commission of the offence under Section 302 read with section 34. There was, however, the question of juvenility involved and the Trial Court held that the accused was not a juvenile as per the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (1986 Act) as he was more than 16 year of age on the date of commission of the offence i.e. 11.12.1981.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The conundrum in the present case was in light of the definition of \u2018juvenile\u2019 under the <strong>1986 Act<\/strong>, which was below sixteen years in case of a boy and below eighteen years in case of a girl on the date the boy or girl is brought for first appearance before the court or the competent authority, whereas the Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2000<strong> (2000 Act)<\/strong>, does not distinguish between a boy or girl and a person under the age of eighteen years is a juvenile. Further, <strong>under the 2000 Act, the age on the date of commission of the offence is the determining factor<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>APPLICABILITY OF THE 2000 ACT<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<hr \/>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong><u>Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand, (2005) 3 SCC 551 verdict and its effect<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Constitution Bench in <strong>Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand, (2005) 3 SCC 551<\/strong> held<\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>the 2000 Act would be applicable in a pending proceeding instituted under the 1986 Act in any court or authority, if the person had not completed eighteen years of age as on 1st April 2001, when the 2000 Act came into force.<\/li>\n<li>the reckoning date for the determination of the age of the juvenile is the date of the offence and not the date when he is produced before the authority or in a court.<\/li>\n<li>Consequently, the 2000 Act would have prospective effect and not retrospective effect except in cases where the person had not completed the age of eighteen years on the date of commencement of the 2000 Act. Other pending cases would be governed by the provisions of the 1986 Act.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong><u>Scheme of the 2000 Act <\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Legislative intent clearly expressed states that all proceedings in respect of a juvenile pending in any court on the date on which the 2000 Act came into force shall continue before that court as if the 2000 Act had not been passed.<\/li>\n<li>If the court comes to a finding that a juvenile has committed the offence, it shall record the finding but instead of passing an order of sentence, forward the juvenile to the Juvenile Justice Board (Board) which shall then pass orders in accordance with the provisions of the 2000 Act, as if the Board itself had conducted an inquiry and was satisfied that the juvenile had committed the offence.<\/li>\n<li>The <strong>proviso<\/strong> states that the Board, for any adequate and special reasons, can review the case and pass appropriate order in the interest of the juvenile.<\/li>\n<li>The expression \u2018all pending cases\u2019 in the Explanation to Section 20 includes not only trial but even subsequent proceedings by way of appeal, revision etc. or any other criminal proceedings. Thus, in respect of pending cases, Section 20 authoritatively commands that the court must at any stage, even post the judgment by the trial court when the matter is pending in appeal, revision or otherwise, consider and decide upon the question of juvenility.<\/li>\n<li>Juvenility is determined by the age on the date of commission of the offence. The factum that the juvenile was an adult on the date of enforcement of the 2000 Act or subsequently had attained adulthood would not matter.<\/li>\n<li>As per Section 64, where a juvenile in conflict with law is undergoing any sentence of imprisonment at the commencement of the 2000 Act, he shall, in lieu of undergoing the sentence, be sent to a special home or be kept in a fit institution in such manner as the state government thinks fit for the remainder of the period of sentence. <span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><em><strong>However, such sentence shall not exceed the maximum period provided in Section 15 of the 2000 Act<\/strong>. T<strong style=\"text-align: center;\">he statute overrules and modifies the sentence awarded, even in decided cases.<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #800000;\"><strong><u>Applicability of the 2000 Act to the facts of the case<\/u><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In light of the aforementioned legal position, the Court noticed that it can, at this stage, decide and determine the question of juvenility of the accused, notwithstanding the fact that he was not entitled to the benefit of being a juvenile on the date of the offence, under the 1986 Act, and had turned an adult when the 2000 Act was enforced.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #333399;\"><strong>\u201cAs the accused was less than 18 years of age on the date of commission of offence on 11.12.1981, he is entitled to be treated as a juvenile and be given benefit as per the 2000 Act.\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 25 OF THE 2015 ACT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Section 25 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is a non-obstante clause which applies to all proceedings in respect of a child alleged or found to be in conflict with law pending before any Board or court on the date of commencement of the 2015 Act, that is, 31st December 2015. It states that <em><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>the pending proceedings shall be continued in that Board or court as if the 2015 Act had not been passed<\/strong>.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>The use of the word \u2018any\u2019 before the board or court in Section 25 of the 2015 Act, would mean and include any court including the appellate court or a court before which the revision petition is pending.<\/li>\n<li>The word \u2018found\u2019 in the phrase \u2018a child alleged or found to be in conflict with law\u2019 is used in past-tense and would apply in cases where an order\/judgment has been passed.<\/li>\n<li>The word \u2018alleged\u2019 would refer to those proceedings where no final order has been passed and the matter is sub-judice.<\/li>\n<li>The expression \u2018court\u2019 is not restricted to mean a civil court which has the jurisdiction in the matter of \u2018adoption\u2019 and \u2018guardianship\u2019 in terms of clause (23) to Section 2 of the 2015 Act . The definition clause is applicable unless the context otherwise requires.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #333399;\"><strong>\u201cIn case of Section 25, the legislature is obviously not referring to a civil court as the section deals with pending proceedings in respect of a child alleged or found to be in conflict with law, which cannot be proceedings pending before a civil court. Since the Act of 2015 protects and affirms the application of the 2000 Act to all pending proceedings, we do not read that the legislative intent of the 2015 Act is to the contrary, that is, to apply the 2015 Act to all pending proceedings.\u201d<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>APPLICABILITY OF THE 2000 ACT VIS-\u00c0-VIS THE 2015 ACT<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court noticed that in light of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act read with Section 25 of the 2015 Act, an accused cannot be denied his right to be treated as a juvenile when he was less than eighteen years of age at the time of commission of the offence, a right which he acquired and has fructified under the 2000 Act, even if the offence was committed prior to enforcement of the 2000 Act on 01.04.2001.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It, hence, concluded,<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #333399;\">\u201cIn terms of Section 25 of the 2015 Act, 2000 Act would continue to apply and govern the proceedings which were pending when the 2015 Act was enforced.\u201d<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\"><strong>CONCLUSION ON FACTS<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">While the Court upheld the conviction of the accused, it set aside the sentence of life imprisonment and remitted the matter to the jurisdiction of the Board for passing appropriate order\/directions under Section 15 of the 2000 Act including the question of determination and payment of appropriate quantum of fine and the compensation to be awarded to the family of the deceased.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>[Satya Deo v. State of Uttar Pradesh,\u00a0 <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/420KZ3Z2\"><b>2020 SCC OnLine SC 809<\/b><\/a>, decided on 07.10.2020]<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court: In a bid to clear the air over the applicability of and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":154914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[31447,2967,8011,43721,43720,36042,35106,3108],"class_list":["post-236905","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-jj-act","tag-Juvenile","tag-juvenile-justice","tag-juvenile-justice-care-and-protection-of-children-act-2015","tag-juvenile-justice-act-1986","tag-juvenile-justice-act-2000","tag-juvenile-justice-board","tag-Juvenility"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>An offence committed by a &#039;juvenile&#039; in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"An offence committed by a &#039;juvenile&#039; in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: In a bid to clear the air over the applicability of and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-10-08T03:30:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-10-09T05:15:30+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/\",\"name\":\"An offence committed by a 'juvenile' in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-10-08T03:30:28+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-10-09T05:15:30+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"An offence committed by a &#8216;juvenile&#8217; in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"An offence committed by a 'juvenile' in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"An offence committed by a 'juvenile' in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle","og_description":"Supreme Court: In a bid to clear the air over the applicability of and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-10-08T03:30:28+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-10-09T05:15:30+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/","name":"An offence committed by a 'juvenile' in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","datePublished":"2020-10-08T03:30:28+00:00","dateModified":"2020-10-09T05:15:30+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/08\/an-offence-committed-by-a-juvenile-in-1981-three-juvenile-justice-statutes-and-a-legal-conundrum-on-their-applicability-read-how-sc-solved-this-riddle\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"An offence committed by a &#8216;juvenile&#8217; in 1981; three Juvenile Justice statutes and a legal conundrum on their applicability. Read how SC solved this riddle"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":6737,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/08\/10\/sc-releases-a-murder-convict-on-finding-out-that-he-was-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence\/","url_meta":{"origin":236905,"position":0},"title":"SC releases a murder convict on finding out that he was juvenile at the time of commission of offence","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 10, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of Pinaki Chandra Ghose and R.K. Agarawal, JJ reaffirmed that once the declaration of juvenility on the date of the commission of offence is established before Court of competent jurisdiction, then the accused must get the benefit under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Supreme Court&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":56051,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/13\/juvenile-justice-board-to-award-sentence-in-proceedings-pending-at-the-time-of-enactment-of-jj-act-2000-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":236905,"position":1},"title":"Juvenile Justice Board to award sentence in proceedings pending at the time of enactment of JJ Act, 2000 Act","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 13, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: While dealing with the question of the sentencing of a juvenile in light of the enactment of the Juvenile Justice Act 2000 during the pendency of the case, the Bench comprising of V. Gopala Gowda and Uday Umesh Lalit JJ., set aside the sentence of life-imprisonment of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":363487,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/11\/supreme-court-relief-for-crime-committed-in-1981-by-12-year-old-convict\/","url_meta":{"origin":236905,"position":2},"title":"Relief to convict under Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 for crime committed in 1981 at age 12: Inside Supreme Court Ruling","author":"Sucheta","date":"October 11, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The Sessions Court having noted that the convict was 16 years old at the time of trial, held that he was entitled to the benefit of the Children Act, 1960 and thus he was directed to be kept in a children\u2019s home in accordance with the provisions of the 1960\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"crime committed in 1981 by 12-year-old","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/crime-committed-in-1981-by-12-year-old.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/crime-committed-in-1981-by-12-year-old.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/crime-committed-in-1981-by-12-year-old.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/crime-committed-in-1981-by-12-year-old.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":317558,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/03\/18\/belated-preliminary-assessment-prejudicial-to-the-interest-of-ccls\/","url_meta":{"origin":236905,"position":3},"title":"Belated Preliminary Assessment: Prejudicial to the Interest of CCLs","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 18, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"by Maharukh Adenwalla\u2020 and Gayatri Virmani\u2020\u2020","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Op Eds&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Belated Preliminary Assessment","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Belated-Preliminary-Assessment.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Belated-Preliminary-Assessment.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Belated-Preliminary-Assessment.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Belated-Preliminary-Assessment.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":89411,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/02\/the-purpose-of-juvenile-justice-act-2000-is-not-to-give-shelter-to-the-accused-of-grave-and-heinous-offences\/","url_meta":{"origin":236905,"position":4},"title":"The purpose of Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 is not to give shelter to the accused of grave and heinous offences","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"December 2, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the case where the appellants were involved in at least 24 cases of various offences allegedly committed between 1988 and 1995 and one was alleged to have committed murder and robbery in the year 1988, the Court refused to rely upon the opinion of the medical board\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6419,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/11\/22\/court-to-decide-whether-a-man-of-40-years-of-age-can-be-tried-afresh-as-a-juvenile-in-a-murder-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":236905,"position":5},"title":"Court to decide whether a man of 40 years of age can be tried afresh as a Juvenile in a murder case","author":"Sucheta","date":"November 22, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a matter before the Court which is one of its kind, the bench of Dipak Mishra and U.U. Lalit JJ., has sought for the assistance of the Attorney General of India on a peculiar question as to whether a 40 year old man, convicted in a murder\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Supreme Court&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236905","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=236905"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236905\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/154914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236905"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236905"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236905"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}