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

2010 Supreme(All) 3949

SHRI KANT TRIPATHI
Prince Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Petitioner Counsel:- Anoop Trivedi
Respondent Counsel:- Govt. Advocate

JUDGMENT:

1. Heard Mr. Anoop Trivedi for the revisionist and the learned AGA for the respondent and perused the record.

2. This is a criminal revision against the judgement and order dated 29.3.2010 passed by the Juvenile Justice Board, Agra (in short 'the Board'), in the case crime no. 365/2009, under sections 201, 411, 302, 364, and 394 IPC, Police Station Tajganj, District Agra.

3. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, the present revision is being disposed of at the stage of admission.

4. The facts of the case are that the revisionist, who is an accused in the aforesaid case, moved an application for declaring him as a juvenile. On 2.9.2009, both the non-judicial members declared the revisionist as a juvenile against which the criminal appeal no. 168 of 2009 was filed, which was allowed by the appellate court on the ground that presence of Principal Magistrate was necessary in the Board. The order passed by the members of the Board without the presence of the Principal Magistrate could not be said to be in accordance with law. Accordingly the appellate court remanded the matter to the Board for a fresh decision. After the remand, the Board passed the order dated 29.3



















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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top