JUDGMENT

B.P. Singh and A.K. Ganguly, JJ. - We have heard Counsel for the parties. The Districts Judges have sent their reports to this Court from which it appears that there are three primary reasons for delay in disposal of cases under the Juvenile Justice Act. In many of the districts, the Court is not available to take up these matters. The second reason is that the witnesses do not appear when the case is fixed for trial. Lastly, the accused themselves default in the matter of appearance.

2. The problem being faced by the Juvenile Justice Courts are more or less the same as are faced by the other Courts. The special treatment given to the juvenile must be recognised and therefore some effort has to be made to dispose of such matters as quickly as possible. At the same time, keeping in view the larger interest of justice no strait jacket formula can be prescribed. However, taking note of the gravity of the situation, we are passing these directions today.

3. The Courts trying juveniles will give priority to those cases where witnesses are available and the juvenile concerned is also present. In such cases, the Court should refuse to grant unnecessary adjournment and proceed with their trial. It is common experience that if such matters are not taken up on the date fixed, at some stage witnesses get frustrated and stop coming to the Court when required. The Courts must, therefore take prompt step to see to it that the witnesses who have appeared before the Court for recording of their depositions should not be asked to go back without recording of their evidence.

Of course, this is subject to the appearance of juvenile concerned.

4. The cases in which the concerned juvenile does not appear before the Court on the date required should be dealt with firmly. Since there is no provision of the juvenile being sent to jail, the trial at times is deliberately delayed with a view to defeat the law. In such cases, the Court must take whatever coercive steps that are within its power and see to it that the juvenile is produced before the Court or appears before the Court on the date fixed. If necessary, the Court will take police aid and the police administration is directed to aid the Courts in securing the presence of such juveniles who deliberately avoid the Court with a view to delay the proceeding. The same principle as it applicable to defaulting juveniles must also apply to defaulting witnesses and in this regard the Court will also take the help of police to secure the presence of the witnesses.

5. Though it is not possible for us to lay down as a matter of rule that all cases must be disposed of finally within a prescribed period, only as a guideline we suggest that the Courts must make its best effort to see to it that the cases involving juveniles is disposed of within six months. There may be cases where for unavoidable reasons it will not be possible to conclude the trial within six months, but all that we wish to emphasise is that the Courts must be conscious of the special responsibility imposed on them by law, and they should not be found wanting in making an effort to dispose of such matters as quickly as possible. Unnecessary adjournments must always be refused and the Courts must take special interest to see that the trial proceeds, even if the prosecution as well as the defence may find excuses to delay the trial. On mere request of the prosecution or the defence, the trial should not be postponed. This Court will take serious view of the matter if it is found that adjournments are granted as a matter of course.

6. We notice that the Board under the Act has not yet been constituted by the Government. It is unfortunate that 14 years have passed by and it has not been possible for the Government to constitute a Board under - the Act. We direct the Government to take prompt steps and to constitute a Board within a period of two months from today.

7. This writ petition is disposed of with these observations.

8. Let a