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

1977 Supreme(MP) 121

SHIV DAYAL, J.S.VERMA, C.P.SEN
DEVISINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.V.TAMSKAR, S.C.DUTT, SURENDRASINGH

SHIV DAYAL, C. J.

( 1 ) DEVISINGH the first appellant, had admittedly not attained the age of 16 years on the date of the offence. He was then a 'child' within the meaning of the definition contained in Section 2 (c) of the M. P. Bal Adhiniyam, 1970 (No. 15 of 1970) (hereinafter called the 'bal Adhiniyam' ). He was tried for the offence of murder punishable under Section 302, Penal Code. Be was, along with three other accused, tried by the Sessions Judge, Seoni, who found him guilty of that offence. However, he was dealt with under Section 6 of the Bal Adhiniyam.

( 2 ) HE preferred this appeal for his acquittal. When the appeal went before a division Bench, the following question arose, which has been referred to us for opinion:-

" whether the exclusive jurisdiction conferred by the provisions of the bal Adhiniyam, 1970, on Juvenile Courts to try a 'child' within the meaning of the definition contained in Section 2 (c) of the Adhiniyam for all offences, including those punishable with life imprisonment or death, continues after the enforcement of the new Cr, P. C. (1974 ). "

In the order of reference, there is a mention of State of M. P. v. Ramesh Nai, 1975 MPLJ 1 : (1975 Cri LJ 713)
















































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