The revision petitioner is accused 3 in S.C. Nos. 327 and 328 of 2005 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, registered for offences punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. He was aged above 16 years on the date of each offence. Since he had already attained the age of sixteen years then, he could not be considered as a Juvenile as per law then in force i.e., the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (referred to in this order as 1986 Act for the sake of convenience). By the time charge-sheet was filed, new Act i.e., Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (referred to in this order as new Act No. 56 of 2000 for the sake of convenience) came into force. Under the new Act, the definition of the word "Juvenile" means a person who has not completed eighteenth year of age. The short point that has therefore arisen is whether such an accused who was not a Juvenile under the 1986 Act can be considered as a Juvenile in conflict with law under the new Act or 2000 Act.

2. On 5-3-2001, there was a dacoity in the godown of K.S.F.C., Jayanagar Branch, Bangalore, and more than fifty sewing machines kept in that godown were tak