J.C.SHAH, D.V.VYAS
State – Appellant
Versus
Bansilal Chhotalal and Anr – Respondent
1. Bansilal Chhotalal, who is found on evidence taken before the learned Sessions Judge at Baroda to be below the age of sixteen and Bai Lilavati were committed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 2nd Court, Baroda, to stand their trial before the Court of Session at Baroda for an offence under Section 302. I. P. C.
The learned Sessions Judge has made a recommendation to this Court that the order of committal passed against Bansilal Chhotalal, accused 1, be quashed, that the said accused Bansilal Chhotalal be ordered to be tried before the Juvenile Court and that it be ordered that Bai Lilavati, accused 2, be tried separately from accused 1 Bansilal Chhotalal.
2. In the District of Baroda a Juvenile Court has been constituted and the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 2nd Court, Baroda, exercises the power Of the Juvenile Court under Section 8, Bombay Children Act, 1943. By Section 9, Bombay Children Act, a Juvenile Court is the only Court competent to try cases in which a child is charged with the commission of an offence and no other Court has jurisdiction to try the child.
Under Section 13 of the Act, in the case of a trial in which a child is being tried together with an
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.