IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA: Cr. Revision No. 51 of 2010. Date of Decision: 25.5.2010. State of H.P. …Petitioner. Versus: Reshar Kumar. …Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting?1 No. For the petitioner. Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General. For Respondent. Mr. S.D.Vasudeva, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud, J(Oral) . The State has preferred this revision petition against the order of Juvenile Justice Board, Una in Criminal Case No. 98 of 2008 titled State of H.P. Vs. Reshar Kumar. The respondent herein was tried for the offences under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A and Section 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act for causing death of one Prittam Singh Thapa. Notice of accusation under these sections was put to the juvenile and it was explained to him that it was open to him to claim regular trial before the Board. The respondents pleaded guilty of the charges. The report of the Probation Officers was called for. As per the report of the Probation Officer, the behaviour of the juvenile is “good”. He was 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?yes. 2 admonished by the Board and entrusted to the custody of his mother. Offences under Sections 279, 337, 304-A I.P.C. are of serious nature. The parents of the respondent had entrusted him with a motor cycle which was involved in the accident despite the fact that he was minor. I have made this observation in view of the fact that it was the parents themselves who are allowing the son to drive the motor cycle and he has been entrusted to the custody of his mother after admonition. He was not major and he was also possessed of a valid driving license. The next question which arises as to what should be the nature of order which could have been passed under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, Section 15 of sub section (1) contemplates: “(1) 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- (a) allow the juvenile to go home after advice or admonition following appropriate inquiry against and counseling to the parent or the guardian and the juvenile, (b) direct the juvenile to participate in group counseling 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; 3 (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 well being of the juvenile for any period not exceeding three years; (g) make an order directing the juvenile to be sent to a special home” This is a fit case where the juvenile Justice Court should have passed an order under sub section (c) of Section 15 directing that the respondent to perform community service in a hospital so that it could have a sober influence on him and he would have been able to comprehend the consequences of rash and negligent driving as also the pain and suffering by the victims in a accident. This was important. Merely admonishing him and handing him over to the custody of his mother was not sufficient. Causing death by negligence is a serious matter. In these circumstances, I direct that the respondent herein should perform community service in the Zonal Hospital, Dharamshala for a period of two months. The District Welfare Officer, Dharamshala will supervise the respondent during this period. The respondent will report to the Medical Superintendent of the Hospital from Monday to Friday every week for a period of two hours in the evening or as would be decided by the Superintendent of the hospital in a manner which does not adversely affect his studies. The respondent is at liberty to approach this Court for modification of this order, if so required. The respondent shall report to the District Welfare Officer, Dharamshala along with a copy of this order on 4th June, 2010. The petition is 4 accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Copy dasti on usual terms. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. May 25, 2010(R)