Back
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Baitha Son of Godaila Baitha @ Ram Sudhisth Baitha – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
The judgment addresses child welfare primarily through the application of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, in a case involving serious offenses against an alleged minor victim and a juvenile accused. (!) (!) (!) For juvenile offenders over 16 years accused of heinous offenses, the case must be preliminarily assessed by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) before transfer to a Children Court, though no such assessment under Section 15 of the JJ Act was conducted or recorded here. (!) (!) Regarding child victims, conclusive proof of minority is mandatory to invoke POCSO provisions, including presumptions under Sections 29 and 30; mere reliance on unproved documents like a school leaving certificate (annexed to the case diary) or inconsistent statements (e.g., FIR stating age 18, later claimed as 15) is insufficient, and Section 172(2) CrPC cannot substitute formal age-determination procedures under POCSO and JJ Acts. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) The court stressed that procedural safeguards for age verification protect the accurate application of child protection laws, preventing misuse. (!) (!)
JUDGMENT :
Ashutosh Kumar, J.
We have heard Mr. Ansul, the learned advocate for the appellant and Mr. Ajay Mishra for the State.
2. The appellant stands convicted under Sections 302, 376, 366(A) and 201 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 vide judgment dated 22.01.2021 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge cum Children Court, Sitamarhi in Trial No.11/2018, (Reg. No. 766/2018) and by order dated 28.01.2021, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-and in default of payment of fine, to further suffer imprisonment for six months each for the offences under Sections 302 and 376 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. For the offence under Section 366(A), the appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for ten years, to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-and in default of payment of fine, to suffer imprisonment for three months. For the offence under Section 201 of the I.P.C., the appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years, to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further imprisonment for one month. The sentences however, have been ordered to run concurrently.
3. The min
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
