R.K.GAUBA
A. M. – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
ORDER :
R.K. Gauba, J.
1. Though the petitioner has given his full description, having regard to the background facts, which would need to be elaborated to an extent little later, it being inappropriate to disclose his identity, he is being referred to in the cause title as "A.M.", and wherever necessary hereinafter as the "petitioner" or "the victim" (or as "PW-1"). For similar reasons, for sake of convenience, the second to fourth respondents would also be referred to as "A1" "A2" and "A3" respectively. The registry while uploading this order on the website shall also take similar care.
2. A1, A2 and A3 had been brought before the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) for inquiry on the basis of report (charge-sheet) under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. PC) submitted on 22.05.2006, upon conclusion of investigation into first information report (FIR) no. 382/2005 (Ex. PW7/B) of police station Mukherjee Nagar. The FIR had been registered on 05.09.2005 on the statement (Ex. PW1/A) of the petitioner, he, at the relevant point of time being a child aged seven and half years. According to the allegations in the FIR, a case of complicity of A1, A2 and A3 who may collective
Amit Kapoor Vs. Ramesh Chander & Anr.
Chander Babu alias Moses vs. State through Inspector of Police and Ors.
Dayal Singh and Ors. vs. State of Uttaranchal
Dinesh Dutt Joshi v. State of Rajasthan
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. Dilbahar Singh
Jabar Singh Vs. Dinesh and Anr.
K. Chinnaswamy Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh
Popular Muthiah vs. State represented by Inspector of Police
Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh and Anr. vs. State of Gujarat and Ors.
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.