SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(Pat) 153

PATNA HIGH COURT
R.A.Sharma and A.K.Prasad JJ.
Free Legal Aid Committee, Jamshedpur
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction No. 1254 of 1991 ;
Decided On : FEBRUARY 26, 1999

A State Government is liable for the infringement of fundamental rights of a citizen by its officer.

Headnote:

JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT - SECTION 23 - ILLEGAL DETENTION OF JUVENILE - COMPENSATION AWARDED - STATE LIABLE FOR INFRINGEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS BY ITS OFFICER - PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION MAINTAINABLE.

Fact of the Case:

A 13-year-old girl, Sukumati Mai Kudada, was remanded to jail custody by an Executive Magistrate in a proceeding under Sec. 107, Cr. P.C., in violation of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. She was released after remaining in illegal custody for about a month and a half.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the remand of the minor girl to jail custody was illegal and in violation of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. It also held that the State Government was liable for the infringement of the girl's fundamental rights by its officer.

Issues: Whether the remand of the minor girl to jail custody was illegal.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, which prohibits the institution of proceedings and passing of orders against a juvenile under Chapter VIII of the Cr. P.C., which includes proceedings under Sec. 107, Cr. P.C.

Final Decision: The court awarded compensation of Rs. 10,000 to the girl for the infringement of her fundamental rights and directed the State Government to make the amount available to the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum, for payment to the girl.

Judgment

A.K.Prasad, J.

1. Free Legal Aid Committee, Jamshedpur a voluntary registered social organisation (for short petitioner Organisation) has brought this writ petition by way of Public Interest Litigation to award compensation of Rs. 10,000.00 (ten thousand only) against the respondents to be paid to Sukumati Mai Kudada D/9 Sri Gonda of village Darkundia, Ps. Mujassil, Chaibasa, district Singhbhum (now West Singhbhum) a juvenile, then aged about 13 years, who remanded to Seraikella Jail by the Subdivisional Magistrate, Seraikella in Misc. Case No. 198 of 1991, a proceeding under Sec. 107. Cr. P.C. which was in violation of the provisions of Juvenile Justice Act. 1986 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) and she was released from the Jail after remaining in illegal custody for about a month and half. It is stated that she along with others were taken into custody due to the agitation against Khadih Kharakai Bandh Yojna. The matter came to the light when the secretary and other members of the petitioner-Organisation visited Seraikella Jail on 7-5-1991 and interviewed Sukumati Mai Kudada.

2. The Sub-divisional Magistrate. Seraikella is the respondent in the writ petition on whose behalf a counter affidavit has been filed sworn by Daud Burth an Executive Magistrate at Seraikella, who has admitted therein that on 11-4-1991 he acted as I/c. Sub-divisional Magistrate, Seraikella, and on that date he had remanded said Sukumati Mai Kudada a minor girl to jail and she was released on 14-5-1991 from the Jail custody. He has further stated that there was agitation of the villagers against Icha Kharakai Bandh Yojna and large number of agitators were on roads and there was apprehension of breach of peace and in Misc. Case No. 198 of 1991, 63 persons men and women were arrested by the Officer-in-Charge, Rajnagar Police Station and at about 10 P.M. he was ordered by the sub-divisional Magistrate to act as In-charge Sub-divisional Magistrate and to remand the arrested persons to jail custody arid at about 2 a.m. on 124-1991 the arrested persons were brought in a bus and produced before him for remand by the Police Officer. He has given explanation in the counter affidavit that there was power failure and darkness inside and outside the room and in candlelight he had to do the work and in meagre light he could not see the features and faces of the arrested persons, who were remanded by him and their age had not been mentioned in the police report and in the circumstances it could not be known to him whether the minor girl, aged between 12-14 years was in the lot remanded by him. He has further stated in the counter affidavit that after 11-4-1991 the regular Sub-Divisional Magistrate held Court and on 25-4-1991 the girl, namely. Sukumati Mai Kudada was not physically produced before him, though her custody warrant had been placed, and ultimately on 14-5-1991 she was released from jail custody. His further stand in the counter affidavit is that the writ petition at the behest of the Petitioner-Organisation is not maintainable and Sukumati Mai Kudada or her family members have made no grievance of violation of fundamental right and by mistake she had been remanded in the proceeding without any malafide intention on the part of the respondent and he undertakes not to commit such mistake in future.

3. Mr. B.P. Jaiswal, learned Counsel for the petitioner Organisation. Mr. A.B. Mahto. J.C. to learned Government Pleader No. II, appearing on behalf of the respondents have already been heard.

4. It is admitted position that Sukumati Mai Kudada a minor girl, aged about 13 years was remanded by Daud Burth (who was I/ c Sub-divisional Magistrate at the relevant time) an Executive Magistrate Seriakella, to jail custody on 11-4-199J in a proceeding under Sec. 107, Cr. P.C. It is not disputed that the said girl was released on 14-5-1991.

The Act came into force with effect from 2nd of October; 1986, Sec. 2(h) of the Act defines a juvenile and a girl





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top