Back
A. BADHARUDEEN
Mini Mathew, W/o. Mathew Jacob – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
A. Badharudeen, J.
Order dated 10.09.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.1099/2024 in S.C.No.480/2024 on the files of the Special Court for trial of cases relating to Atrocities and Sexual Violence against Women and Children (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 'POCSO Act' for short), is under challenge in this petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS' for short).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the impugned order.
3. In this matter prosecution alleges commission of offences punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short) as well as Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 ('JJ Act' for short). Prosecution case is that the accused, who was the manager of ‘Kaliveedu Day Care’ physically assaulted the victim child, aged 1 ½ years, of the defacto complainant from 05.12.2016 to 23.05.2017 and thereby caused mental and physical suffering to the child. Initially, the case was numbered as C.C.No.1317/2017 and charge was framed and trial proceeded. Thereafter it was brought to the notice of the learned Magistrate th
The court affirmed that under Section 86(4) of the JJ Act, all relevant offences must be tried by the Children's Court, invalidating prior proceedings in the Magistrate's Court.
The court established that jurisdiction for offences under the JJ Act is determined by the amended Section 86(4), which applies retrospectively.
The notification of a children's court does not invalidate prior trials conducted by a Magistrate, emphasizing the need for speedy trials and the principle that procedural errors should not lead to s....
Procedural amendments are presumed to be retrospective in nature unless the amending statute expressly or impliedly provides otherwise. The forum for legal proceedings is a matter of procedural law, ....
The omission to specify the exact offence in a committal order is not fatal if the evidence clearly supports the need for a Sessions trial.
The central legal point established is that a Judicial Magistrate, IInd Class, does not have the power to take cognizance in cases where the punishment exceeds two years, as per Section 190(2) of the....
The determination of juvenility in cases involving children in conflict with law must be conducted by the Juvenile Justice Board, and any contrary determination by a Magistrate is without jurisdictio....
Procedure provided under Sections 15 and 19 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 has been held to be mandatory.
The court affirmed that the Board's reliance on social and counseling reports satisfied statutory requirements for trying a child as an adult under the Juvenile Justice Act.
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
