SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(Mad) 1526

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. VENKATARAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYAN
V. Balachandar
Versus
The Superintendent
Writ Petition No.11835 of 2008
Decided on : 20-05-2008

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:V. Karthick, Advocate.
For the Respondent: M. Dhandapani, Spl. G.P.

The paramount importance of juvenile rehabilitation and the intention of the parliament to release juveniles who had spent three years in detention.

Headnote:

Mandamus - Juvenile Detention - Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 1986, Section 21; Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, Section 15; Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, Section 15(g); Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2006, Section 15(g)

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a social activist, filed a writ petition seeking the release of juveniles detained for more than three years in a Special Home. The respondent conceded to the relief sought by the petitioner in their counter affidavit.

Finding of the Court:

The court considered the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Acts and directed the immediate release of juveniles who had completed three years of detention, limited the detention period for juveniles who had not completed three years, and included the detention period served in Observation Homes for calculating the total period of stay.

Issues: Detention of juveniles for more than three years, interpretation of provisions under the Juvenile Justice Acts, and the applicability of amended provisions to juveniles detained prior to the amendments.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of the amended provisions of the Juvenile Justice Acts, emphasizing the paramount importance of juvenile rehabilitation and the intention of the parliament to release juveniles who had spent three years in detention.

Final Decision: The court directed the immediate release of juveniles who had completed three years of detention, limited the detention period for juveniles who had not completed three years, and included the detention period served in Observation Homes for calculating the total period of stay.

Judgment :-

K. Venkataraman, J.

The petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition for Mandamus directing the respondent to release the juveniles, who have been detained for more than three years in the Special Home for Boys, Vellore.

2. The short facts which led to the filing of the present writ petition are as follows:-

(a) The petitioner had worked in the State Bank of Travancore and on his retirement, he has involved in voluntary service in Ramana Kendra. He is a social activist, connected with the Government Special Home for Boys, in the capacity as Member, Home Welfare Committee. He has also involved with the Government Children Home for Boys, Ranipet and Government After Care Home for Women in Vellore and he visits these institutions frequently to interact and educate the inmates. In that capacity, he has filed the present writ petition in public interest to seek redressal from this Court regarding a common cause involving juveniles detained for more than three years.

(b) Recently, the petitioner has gone through the records of the Government Special Homes for Boys at Vellore and found that several juveniles have been kept in detention for more than three years in the Government Special Home at Vellore. The particulars have been given in the affidavit in support of the writ petition.

(c) It is further averred that Section 15 (g) of the amended Act 33 of 2006 provides for an order directing the juveniles to be sent to a special home for a period of three years. A close reading of the provisions under the said Act would indicate that the procedural law pertaining to a juvenile has been substantially amended and altered by the provisions of Act 56 of 2000 along with amendment Act 33 of 2006. Thus, the juvenile who has been detained under the Act and who has completed three years, will have to be reviewed and the juvenile will have to be forthwith released. Since the provisions of the said Act have not been noticed by the authorities concerned, several children, who have been detained in the Government Special Home for Girls, Kellys, Chennai and who have also spent more than three years in the Special Home, continue to remain till they reach the age of juvenility and hence, the petitioner has approached this Court for the relief set out earlier.

3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent, which in nutshell is as follows:-The particulars with regard to the juveniles, who have been detained, have been set out in paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 13 and 15 of the counter affidavit. After setting out the persons, who have been detained, finally, at the end of the counter, the respondent has sought for a direction from this Court for the release of the juveniles from the Special Home who have completed three years of detention and also to revise the order of Juvenile Justice Board to limit the detention for maximum period of three years, who have not completed three years period and to issue orders to include the detention period served in Observation Homes by the juveniles for the calculation of total period of stay. Thus, practically what the petitioner has sought for has been conceded by the respondent by his counter.

4. We have considered the submissions of Mr.Karthick, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Dhandapani, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

5. Since several facts have not been disputed by the respondent in their counter, we are not dealing with each one of the contentions raised by the petitioner. But, however, for better appreciation of the facts, it would be more appropriate to extract the provision of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 1986 and more so, Section 21 of the said Act, which reads as follows:-

" 21. Orders that may be passed regarding delinquent juveniles – (1) Where a Juvenile Court is satisfied on inquiry that a juvenile has committed an offence, then notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law f

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top