IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.51259 of 2007 RUPAK KUMAR @ RUPAK @ NANHE Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 4. 2.9.2008 Heard. The learned Sessions Judge has mentioned in paragraph 3 of his rejection order that the petitioner is admittedly aged about 18 years but the petitioner was not ready to take the plea of being a juvenile. It is not that a person has to take the plea of juvenility, rather it is the duty of the court, if it has some reasons to believe a man to be a juvenile or to treat him as such to direct an enquiry to be held, else the very purpose of formulating the special act, i.e., Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children)Act,2000 shall be frustrated. If the learned Sessions Judge was alive to the situation that the petitioner was 18 years of age, then he could look to the provision of Section 5 of the Cr.P.C which bars maintaining any procedure on behalf of any person who could be governed by a special law and for whom there could be special jurisdiction created or power conferred or any special power procedure - 2 - prescribed by the special law. The above noted Juvenile Justice Act is completely a Code in itself and by virtue of the bar created by Section 5 of the Cr.P.C, this petition does not appear maintainable. The court below, i.e., the court which is enjoined upon the jurisdiction of holding an enquiry either by itself or through a Board constituted for the purpose, shall hold an enquiry under Section 49 of the above noted special act and then deal with the petition accordingly. Petition is disposed of as of not maintainable. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through fax at the cost of the petitioner. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )