Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Mohd. Bilal v. State Of U.P. And Another - APPLICATION U/s 482 No. 14273 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 5311 (8 November 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 54

Criminal Misc. Application No. 14273 of 2005.

Mohd. Bilal Vs. State of U.P. and another.

Hon. Mrs. Poonam Srivastava, J.

Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Anubhav Trivedi, Advocate, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

The order dated 17.9.2005 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, State Vs. Bilal and others, relating to case crime No. 112 of 2005, under Sections 307, 377 and 511 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali, District Meerut has been challenged in this application.

The submission on behalf of the applicant is that the applicant is aged about 14 years and student of class VIII and, therefore, he is a child within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred as the Act). A criminal case was instituted at the instance of opposite party no.2. A copy of the first information report is annexed as Annexure-2 to the affidavit. The complicity of the applicant came to light when the two arrested accused named the implication of the applicant in the confessional statement before the police. A Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9339 of 2005, State Vs. Mohd. Bilal was filed and a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 8.9.2005 stayed the arrest of the applicant for a period of three weeks and further directed that an application be moved before the Juvenile Justice Board. A copy of the said order has been annexed as Annexure-3. In pursuance to the aforesaid order, an application was moved on 17.9.2005 before the Juvenile Justice Board, Meerut supported by an affidavit of the father of the applicant, which has also been annexed as Annexure Nos. 4 and 5.

The grievance of the applicant is that the Juvenile Justice Board after hearing the applicant and taking into consideration the affidavit filed in support of the application, directed him to surrender in the judicial custody and only then compliance of the order of this Court dated 8.9.2005 can be made. This order of the Juvenile Justice Board passed on 17.9.2005 is challenged in this application.

I have perused the impugned order. The order is that until the applicant is taken in judicial custody and produced before the Board, his age can not be ascertained as to whether he is juvenile or not. Section 10 of the Act specifically provides that the juvenile should be placed under the charge of a special juvenile police unit or the designated police officer and Section 11 of the Act also provides for control of custodian over juvenile. In the circumstances, it is absolutely clear that the scheme of the Act is such with a view to ensure care and protection of juvenile and also to cater their develop and their need by adopting a child friendly approach in the adjudication of matters in the interest of children and their rehabilitation. In the circumstances, the objection raised on behalf of the applicant appears to be justified. The learned Magistrate, by means of the impugned order has relegated the applicant who is said to be aged only 14 years in judicial custody that is to say with the other criminals which will certainly have an adverse effect and the very purpose of the Act will stand defeated. The order of the Division Bench in respect of this very applicant staying his arrest for a period of three weeks till the Board arrived a decision regarding the age of the applicant, was only with an intention that the applicant may not come in close proximity with the other criminals.

In the circumstances, this application is finally disposed of with a direction that the applicant may be permitted to appear before the Juvenile Justice Board on the date fixed along with his father and the Magistrate shall release the applicant after taking a personal bond of the applicant and his father Nasiruddin. The father shall also file an affidavit along with an undertaking for the good behaviour of his son and that he will ensure that the applicant is not in bad company. The Board shall proceed to hold an inquiry to ascertain the age of the applicant in accordance with the procedure laid down under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

Dt/-   .10.2005.



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.