JUDGMENT & ORDER :

1. Heard Shri Rama Kant Jayswal, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the application for considering the applicant's juvenility submits that during the pendency of Sessions Trial No.366/2000 arising out of Case Crime No.167/1999 under Sections 302, 352 I.P.C., P.S.-Atrauli, District-Hardoi, on 20.10.2010, an application has been moved on behalf of the applicant/Naresh Kumar Dixit for declaring him as juvenile, which was rejected vide order dated 09.06.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (E.C.Act), Hardoi. Against the said order, Criminal Revision No.402 of 2015 has been filed before this Court, which was allowed by order dated 22.04.2016. The operative portion of the same reads as under :-

"In the result, the revision is allowed and the impugned order dated 09.06.2015 passed by the learned trial court is set aside. It is directed that the learned court below shall consider the claim of juvenility of the revisionist again in view of the provisions of Juvenile Justice Act and the relevant case laws on the subject."

3. In view of the order dated 22.04.2016, an another application has been moved for considering the claim of the juvenility of the accused, which was rejected vide order dated 15.07.2016 passed by the trial court on the ground that the final judgment in the matter in question has been passed on 04.04.2016. Thereafter, the same was challenged by the applicant by filing Criminal Revision No.821 of 2016 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 30.08.2016. The operative portion of the same is being quoted herein below :-

"In these circumstances, the revision is disposed of by stipulating that it would be open for the revisionist to make an appropriate application before the Appellate Court by bring the aforesaid facts to the notice of the Appellate Court and pray that the relevant record i.e. the record in respect of the inquiry held into the claim of juvenility of the revisionist be forwarded to the trial court so as to enable it to comply with the order dated 22.04.2016 passed by this Court in criminal revision no.402 of 2015."

4. Thereafter, an application (Crl. Misc. Application No.91038 of 2016) has been moved in the present appeal and the same was rejected vide order dated 21.09.2016. The operative portion of the same reads as under :-

"Accordingly, the application in question is rejected, however, as prayed, liberty is given to the accused/Naresh Kumar Dixit to claim juvenility in the appeal as per the provision of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015."

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in view of the above stated facts, the present application moved on behalf of the application in respect to the claim of the juvenility may be considered by this Court.

6. In this regard, he has placed reliance on the provisions as provided under Sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 8 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as Act), which reads as under :-

"(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force but save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the Board constituted for any district shall have the power to deal exclusively with all the proceedings under this Act, relating to children in conflict with law, in the area of jurisdiction of such Board.

(2) The powers conferred on the Board by or under this Act may also be exercised by the High Court and the Children's Court, when the proceedings come before them under section 19 or in appeal, revision or otherwise."

7. Accordingly, he has submitted that as per Sub-section (2) of the Act, this Court has got same power which has been conferred on the Board by or under this Act while considering the matter in respect to the claim of the juvenility of the applicant. Once the entire material is available on recor

Click Here to Read the rest of this document