Back
Shahabanath, D/o. Nafeesa – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
The victims of the offence respectively in C.C.Nos.167, 212, 213, 214, 215 and 216 of 2007 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Nadapuram have filed these revision petitions invoking the provision of Sections 397 read 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Code). They challenge the common judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Vatakara in Crl.Appeal Nos.283, 284 285, 286, 287 and 288 of 2010 dated 27.04.2012, by which the judgments of conviction and the orders of sentence rendered by the learned Magistrate in the aforesaid calendar cases were set aside. The learned Sessions Judge remanded the matter to the trial court for a fresh trial in accordance with law.
2. The judgments of the trial court were set aside on the sole ground that before pronouncing the said judgments, children's court was notified under Section 25 of the Commissions for Protection for Child Rights Act, 2005 (for short “the Child Rights Act”). The petitioners would contend that having trial before the Magistrate already begun and the children's court notified for the purpose of speedy trial alone, the appellate court ought not to have set aside the judgments of the trial cou
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....
The court established that jurisdiction for offences under the JJ Act is determined by the amended Section 86(4), which applies retrospectively.
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 jurisdiction of Children's Court in juvenile cases depends on whether the offence is heinous and the offender is between 16-18 years, as per relevant acts.
A child cannot be tried for an offense with adults, as mandated by S.23 of the Kerala Children Act, 1972.
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.
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, ....
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 application for separate charges was not maintainable under the circumstances, reinforcing the importance of a reasoned approach in judicial decisions regarding charges in....
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
