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

1984 Supreme(All) 24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
O. P. Saxena
MANGE - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. - Respondents
Criminal Misc. Petition 5034 Of 1983
Decided On : 01/09/1984

Advocates Appeared:
KESHAV SAHAI, R.C.Singh

The Code of Criminal Procedure is not applicable to a special law that provides for the trial of juvenile offenders, unless there is a specific provision to the contrary.

Headnote:

JUVENILE JUSTICE - U. P. CHILDREN ACT, 1952 - SECTIONS 2 (4), 2 (7), 2 (13), 60, 61, 29, 79 - CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 - SECTION 5 - JURISDICTION OF JUVENILE COURT - SPECIAL LAW - APPLICABILITY OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - BAIL TO JUVENILE - APPEAL AGAINST BAIL ORDER - JURISDICTION OF SESSIONS JUDGE TO ENTERTAIN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 439 (2) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a juvenile, was granted bail by the Juvenile Judge. The complainant filed an application under Section 439 (2) Criminal Procedure Code before the Sessions Judge, who directed the medical examination of the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the jurisdiction of the Sessions Judge to entertain the application.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Sessions Judge had no jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section 439 (2) Criminal Procedure Code, as the U. P. Children Act, 1952 is a special law that provides for the trial of juvenile offenders and the Code of Criminal Procedure is not applicable to it in the absence of any specific provision to the contrary.

Issues: 1. Whether the Sessions Judge had jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section 439 (2) Criminal Procedure Code. 2. Whether the U. P. Children Act, 1952 is a special law that excludes the applicability of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on Section 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which provides that the Code is not applicable to any special or local law for the time being in force, or any special jurisdiction or power conferred or any special form of procedure prescribed by any other law for the time being in force, unless there is a specific provision to the contrary. 2. The court also relied on the provisions of the U. P. Children Act, 1952, which provide for the establishment of juvenile courts and the procedure for the trial of juvenile offenders. The court held that these provisions constitute a special law that excludes the applicability of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings pending before the Sessions Judge.

0. P. SAXENA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the proceedings pending before the Sessions Judge, Meerut under Sections 439 (2) Criminal Procedure Code.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner is being tried for an offence under Section 377 Indian Penal Code on 8. 4. 83 the Juvenile Judge passed an order to the effect that the petitioner is below 16 years of age. On ] 3. 4. 1983 the opposite party No. 2, the complainant, gave an application for getting the petitioner medically examined by the Chief Medical Officer. On 14. 4. 1983 the Juvenile Judge allowed bail to the petitioner. The opposite party No. 2 gave an application under Section 439 (2) Criminal Procedure Code before the Sessions Judge, Meerut. On 3. 6. 1983 the Sessions Judge, Meerut directed the medical examination of the petitioner by the Chief Medical Officer. This order was passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 630 of 1983. The Chief Medical Officer, Meerut examined the petitioner on 9/6/1983 and Annexure CA. 3 is the copy of the examination report. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the proceedings before the learned Sessions Judge as be has no jurisdiction in the matter.


( 3 ) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.) Section 2 (4) of the U. P. Children Act, 1952 defines a Child as below: Child means a person under the age of sixteen years. Section 2 (7) of the Act defines a Juvenile Court as below: Juvenile Court means a court established under sub-section (1) or Section 60 and includes a Court sitting in the manner provided by sub-section (2) of that Section. Section 2 (13) of the Act defines a youthful offender as below: Youthful offender means any child who has been found to have committed an offence punishable with transportation or imprisonment Section 60 of the Act provides as below: Juvenile Court

(1) The State Government may establish a juvenile court for any local area in a district and appoint a judge of such court. (2) For purposes of this Act, a court means the juvenile court established by the State Government for any area and includes a court of sessions and a magistrate of the first class specially empowered to exercise the powers of Court under this Act.

Section 61 of the Act provides as below: Powers of Juvenile Courts and other Courts. Save as otherwise provided in this Act(1) Where a Juvenile court has been established for any local area, such court shall deal all cases in which a child is charged with the infringement of law and shall deal with and dispose of all other proceedings under this Act, but shall not have power to try any case in which an adult is charged with an offence under Chapter III, and (2) Where a juvenile court has not been established for any local area, no court other than courts empowered under Section 60 to exercise the powers of a juvenile court shall have power to deal with any case to which a child is charged with the infringement of law or to deal with or dispose of any other proceedings under this Act.

Section 29 of the Act provides for bail to a Juvenile. Section 79 of the Act provides for an appeal from various orders under the Act and includes an order passed under Section 29 of the Act. Section 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 provides as below: Nothing contained in this Code shall, in the absence of a specific provision to the contrary, affect any special or local law for the time being in force, or any special jurisdiction or power conferred, or any special form of procedure prescribed by any other law for the time being in force.

( 4 ) IN Jaddu v. State, it was held with reference to the Indian Forest Act that when the law prescribes that particular court shall try a particular offence, no other court can try it.

( 5 ) IN re Anthony2, the offence committed by a juvenile was exclusively triable by a Court of Session. Section 44 of the Madras Children Act (Act 4 of 1920 i and R








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