IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Appeal No. 103 of 2002 Dinesh Prasad Pant ...…………. Appellant versus State of Uttaranchal ...…………. Opposite party ----------- Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State/respondent. JUDGMENT Coram : Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J. Barin Ghosh, C. J. (Oral) Under Clause (h) of Section 2 of Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, which came into force on 2nd October, 1987, until the said Act was repelled by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which came into effect on 30th December, 2000, “juvenile” meant a boy who has not attained the age of sixteen years or a girl who has not attained the age of eighteen years. In the instant case, a murder took place on 13th February,1993 when the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 was in force. In connection with the said murder a charge was framed, where it was alleged that the appellant is said to have committed the murder. At the trial, the appellant in addition to denying having committed the murder, also contended that he is a juvenile and accordingly, he is entitled to the protections available under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. In course of trial, it was ascertained that the appellant is aged more than 16 years, but below 18 years as on date of the 2 incident resulting in murder of the victim. The trial court accordingly, held that the appellant was not entitled to the protections under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. The trial court convicted the appellant on being satisfied on the evidence on record that the charge of murder against the appellant stands proved. Being aggrieved thereby, the present appeal was preferred in 2002. During the pendency of the present appeal a proviso and an explanation were appended to section 20 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, along with sub section (4) of Section 1 and Section 7A. By reason of the explanation thus appended to Section 20 it became obligatory to take notice of the age of a juvenile in conflict of Law as mentioned in the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and as given in clause (l) of Section 2 thereof, which in turn provides that a Juvenile in conflict of Law would be he who had not completed 18 years of age on the date of incident in respect whereof he has been implicated. In terms of sub section (4) of Section 1 of the Act, the provisions of the Act shall apply to all cases involving detention, prosecution or sentence of imprisonment of juveniles. By reason of Section 7A, the juvenile became entitled to have his juvenility examined at any stage of any proceeding pending at any court. In such view of the matter a drastic change was brought in Section 20 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which provides that the proceeding in respect of juvenile pending in any court will continue in that court proceeding on the basis as if the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 has not come into force with imposition of an obligation on the court to forward its finding to the Board, in case offence committed by a juvenile is accepted, for passing such 3 orders on the basis of such finding. In other words, only in case juvenility of a person is ascertained in accordance with the law applicable at the time of committing the offence and such a person was involved with the offence then only Section 20 prescribed the procedure as mentioned therein. Section 20 of its own did not direct that in such case, juvenility shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The same was however, stated in so many words while the explanation appended to Section 20 was added. In the circumstances, as called upon by Section 20 of the Act, we have no other option but to set aside the sentence as awarded by the trial court and to forward the finding of the trial court to the Juvenile Justice Board, Chamoli for the purpose of passing such order in respect of the appellant in accordance with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, proceeding on the basis that the appellant while juvenile had committed a gruesome offence of murder. This order, however, will not prevent the Juvenile Justice Board, Chamoli to review the case and pass appropriate order in the interest of the juvenile, but however, before reviewing the case it must record adequate and special reasons as are required to be recorded in terms of the proviso to Section 20 of the Act. We make it clear that no argument was advanced before us to suggest that the findings recorded by the learned trial Judge is erroneous. (U.C. Dhyani, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 07.12.2011 07.12.2011 Kaushal