VINOD PRASAD
Manish Tyagi – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER
Vinod Prasad, J.—The neat legal question which is involved in this application is as to whether Sessions Judge had got the power of Juvenile Justice Board in consonance with Section 6(2) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. (Act No. 56 of 2000) or not? The contention of Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant, Manish Tyagi is that under the aforesaid sub-section, Sessions Judge as well as the High Court has been statutorily conferred with such power vis-a-vis Juvenile Justice Board. The submission is that in view of the provision of Section 6(2) of the Act there cannot be another inquiry by Juvenile Justice Board for determining as to whether the accused is a Juvenile of not once the inquiry conducted by the Additional Sessions Judge has declared him to be such. Before determining the proposition of law harangued by the applicant a thumb nail description of the facts seems to be indispensable which is sketched below.
2. The applicant, as is perceptible from the pleading made in the affidavit appended along with this Criminal Misc. Application, under Section 482 Cr.P.C. invoking the inherent power of this Court, are that the
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.