Back
E. S. INDIRESH, RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
Shiddesh Bharamappa Channagiri – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka, Hirekerur Police Station Represented by State Public Prosecutor – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments concerning the assessment of ccl's age and trial (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. court observations on trial procedures and representatives (Para 17 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. key legal ratification regarding age of ccl and its consequences (Para 19 , 28 , 29) |
| 5. conviction sustained where substantial evidence supports the charges against the juvenile. (Para 57 , 60) |
| 6. final conclusion on appeal outcomes (Para 59 , 61 , 64 , 66 , 68) |
JUDGMENT :
Ramachandra D. Huddar, J.
The present appeal has been filed by the Child in Conflict with Law (hereinafter called as 'CCL') impugning the orders dated 9th April, 2021 passed in Special Sessions Case No.31 of 2018 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, FTSC-1, Haveri.
Briefly, the facts leading to this appeal are as under:
FIR was registered against CCL by the Hirekerur Police Station for the offences punishable under sections 366, 376(2)(i) of IPC, under Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 and under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 as amended (in short 'SC & ST (PA) Act').
2. Af
Proper procedures must be followed in determining the age and maturity of a Child in Conflict with Law to ensure fair trial under the Juvenile Justice Act.
The proceedings against a Child in Conflict with Law must comply strictly with statutory inquiry requirements for fair trial rights, or they may be quashed due to procedural violations.
The lack of compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards in juvenile trials invalidates the conviction, necessitating adherence to due process under the Juvenile Justice Act.
Procedure provided under Sections 15 and 19 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been held to be mandatory.
The court emphasized the necessity of providing a child in conflict with law access to assessment reports to ensure compliance with principles of natural justice under the Juvenile Justice Act.
The court ruled that failure to conduct timely and proper assessments under the Juvenile Justice Act invalidates the trial of a juvenile as an adult, emphasizing adherence to statutory timelines.
The conviction of a child in conflict with law under POCSO Act was upheld based on consistent witness testimonies and medical evidence; the presumptive guilt clause under POCSO aids prosecution. Sent....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
