S. S. SUNDAR, SUNDER MOHAN
Dhanalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This is an unfortunate case of a juvenile being tried as an adult, and convicted, and sentenced to imprisonment, and later found that he was a juvenile.
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the above petition are as follows:
(b) The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Panruti by the judgment dated 14.10.2011 found the prison inmate guilty of the offence under Section 394 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo ten years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo one year of rigorous imprisonment.
(c) The prison inmate Dakshinamurthy filed an appeal before this Court in Crl.A. No. 763 of 2011. This Court, by judgment dated 22.02.2019 confirmed the judgment of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, the prison inmate is serving the sentence and is now confined in Central Prison, Cuddalore.
(d) It appears that subsequently it was found that the prison inmate Dakshinamurthy was a juvenile at the time of the commission of offence on 03.07.2009, as he was born on 10.07.1991.
(e) Thereafter, the brother of the prison inmate filed a habeas corpus
Ashwani Kumar Saxena v. State of M.P. (2012) 9 SCC 750 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 594
Bhola Bhagat v. State of Bihar
Bhoop Ram v. State of U.P. (1989) 3 SCC 1 : 1989 SCC (Cri) 486
Dharambir v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Gurpreet Singh v. State of Punjab
Hari Ram v. State of Rajasthan
Jayendra v. State of U.P. (1981) 4 SCC 149 : 1981 SCC (Cri) 809
Jitendra Singh alias Babboo Singh and Another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P. 1995 Supp (4) SCC 419 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 395
Satish v. State of M.P. (2009) 14 SCC 187 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 1320
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.