Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Ambika S Nagal - Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous (Main) No. 331 of 2018
Decided On : 10-06-2020
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 - Sections 2(k), 2(l), 4, 6, 23, 27, 54 Indian Penal Code - Sections 88, 89 The court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and the Indian Penal Code. It discussed the definitions of 'juvenile' and 'juvenile in conflict with law', the constitution of Juvenile Justice Boards, the powers of the Boards, and the punishment for cruelty to a juvenile or child. The court also examined Sections 88 and 89 of the Indian Penal Code, which provide exceptions for acts done in good faith for the benefit of a child.
Fact of the Case:
Two school girls fell to their death and were declared dead upon arrival at the hospital. A complaint was filed against the Mathematics Teacher and Principal of the School for abetting the girls to commit suicide. The investigation concluded that the Class Teacher had slapped the girls, causing mental and physical suffering. The Judicial Magistrate concluded that a case was made out against the accused under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner challenged the order, arguing that she should not be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board as she is not a juvenile, and that she is protected from prosecution under Sections 88 and 89 of the Indian Penal Code. The court held that the petitioner should not be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board and that she is protected under Sections 88 and 89 of the Indian Penal Code.
Finding of the Court:
The court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and the Indian Penal Code. It concluded that the Juvenile Justice Board has jurisdiction only over juveniles or children in conflict with the law, and not over other persons who have committed offenses under the Acts. The court also examined Sections 88 and 89 of the Indian Penal Code, which provide exceptions for acts done in good faith for the benefit of a child. It held that the petitioner's actions were protected under these exceptions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner should not be tried by the Juvenile Justice Board and that she is protected under Sections 88 and 89 of the Indian Penal Code.
Result: The petition is allowed, the FIR is quashed, and the proceedings in the trial court are set aside.
Key Points: - The Juvenile Justice Board has jurisdiction only over juveniles or children in conflict with law, not over adults (non-juveniles) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - For offences under the 2000 Act, there is no provision like Section 86 of the 2015 Act to designate adults to the Board; such adults must be tried in ordinary courts or as per CrPC (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - Sections 88 and 89 IPC provide exceptions for acts done in good faith for the benefit of a child, including acts by guardians or teachers, which can shield such actions from criminal liability if interventions are reasonable and in good faith; excessive punishment may void those protections (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - In the present case, relegating an adult Class Teacher to the Juvenile Justice Board was illegal; the FIR was quashed and proceedings set aside (!) (!) . - The act of corporal punishment by a teacher, if moderate and reasonable and done in good faith for the correction/discipline, may fall within Sections 88 and 89 IPC protections, but excessive or unreasonable punishment may not (!) (!) (!) (!) . - The 2015 Act introduces different provisions, including Section 86 and definitions of Children’s Court and related authorities; there are differences in designation and cognizability compared to the 2000 Act (!) (!) (!) .
JUDGMENT
Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - On 24.9.2012 at about 4.25 p.m., after receiving a telephonic call in Police Post, Sanjauli, that near Nav Bahar at Kala Dhaank (Cliff), adjacent to Durga Gas Agency, two school girls had fallen, Assistant Sub Inspector, Incharge Police Chowki, rushed to the spot alongwith Police officials and found blood spread on the spot as by that time both the girls had been taken to Indira Gandhi Medical College & Hospital, Shimla (IGMC). On arriving at IGMC, it came to knowledge of the police that the girls had been declared dead.
2. On 28.9.2012, on the basis of complaint received from parents/guardians of 12 years old deceased girls, FIR No.164/2012 dated 30.9.2012 was registered, under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), against the Mathematics Teacher (Petitioner) and Principal of the School, for abetting the girls to commit suicide.
3. After completion of investigation, as per Challan presented in the Court, no case under Section 306 IPC against the Principal as well as the petitioner was made out. However, it was concluded by the Investigating Officer that there was evidence on record that Class Teacher (petitioner) had slapped deceased girls (two slaps to each deceased girl) and, thus, she had committed an offence under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as 2000 Act) and Section 323 IPC, for causing unnecessary mental and physical suffering to girls by assault. Challan was presented before the concerned Magistrate, wherein, at the time of consideration of charge, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (for short 'JMIC') has passed impugned order dated 20.6.2018, concluding that prima facie a case under Section 23 of 2000 Act and Section 323 IPC is made out against the accused (petitioner), but instead of putting Notice of Accusation or framing charge, the JMIC has come to the conclusion that the jurisdiction to deal with the matter under Section 23 of 2000 Act is with Juvenile Justice Board (for short 'Board') and, therefore, the JMIC has directed the petitioner to appear before the Board on date mentioned in order.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the JMIC, petitioner, by way of instant petition, has approached this Court on two counts.
5. Firstly, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the JMIC has wrongly relegated the petitioner to the Board as she is not a juvenile or child in conflict with law but is an adult against whom the Board has no power to proceed.
6. Secondly, on the ground that no case is made out for prosecuting the petitioner (Class Teacher) under Section 23 of 2000 Act and Section 323 IPC, as ingredients for commission of offence under Section 23 of 2000 Act are not existing and further that in view of Sections 88 & 89 IPC, petitioner is protected from being prosecuted not only under Section 323 IPC but also Section 23 of 2000 Act.
7. In present case, at the time of commission of alleged offence 2000 Act was in force, which has now been replaced by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as 2015 Act'). For determining the issue raised on behalf of the petitioner with respect to jurisdiction, provisions of 2000 Act shall be relevant, however, for deciding the issue to avoid further litigation on this issue under the 2015 Act, corresponding provisions of 2015 Act are also being referred in the discussion hereinafter.
8. Relevant provisions of 2000 Act, necessary to be referred, are as under:
2(k) "Juvenile" or "child" means a person who has not completed eighteenth year of age.
2(l) "juvenile in conflict with law" means a juvenile who is alleged to have committed an offence and has not completed eighteenth year of age as on the date of commission of such offence.
4. Juvenile Justice Board.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the State Government may,
AI
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
