( 1. ) THIS appeal raises the question whether, on construction of the various provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Bal Adhiniyam, 1970 (No. 15 of 1970) (hereinafter referred to as the Bal Adhiniyam), a child within the meaning of that expression as defined in the Act when charged with the offence of murder has also to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of that Act.

( 2. ) THE appellant Rupsingh, admittedly, aged 14 years when tried for the offence of murder was charged with having committed the murder of Mst. Balgi wife of Nakala of village Jhauli, tahsil Aliraipur, district Jhabua on 14-4-1970. The challan was filed in the Court of the Magistrate First Class, Alirajpur for the said offence against the appellant on 15-5-1970,who after holding an inquiry in accordance with Section 207-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 by the order dated 3-9-1970 passed under Sec-213 of the Code committed the appellant for trial by the Court of Session. The first Additional Sessions Judge, Alirajpur after holding the requisite trial on such commitment has held the charge proved and convicted the appellant on 29-1-1971 for the offence of murder under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and passed the sentence of life imprisonment. The present appeal is against the said conviction and sentence.

( 3. ) THE main ground urged in support of this appeal is that the order of commitment by the Magistrate First Class, Alirajpur and the consequent trial by the Sessions Court resulting in conviction and sentence was without jurisdiction inasmuch as the Bal Adhiniyam having been extended to the area in question before the challan had been put up, the trial of the appellant should have been only in accordance with the pro-visions of the Bal Adhiniyam and that not having been done the entire proceedings before the Magistrate First Class and in the Sessions Court need to be quashed.

( 4. ) HAVING heard at length Shri B. S. Johar, learned counsel for the appellant, as also the Learned Advocate General on behalf of the State and Shri P. K. Saxena, appearing as amicus curiae, we have reached the conclusion that the appeal must be allowed on the above ground alone. For this reason, we shall state only such facts as are relevant for deciding the only question involved in this appeal.

( 5. ) THE Bal Adhiniyam after being enacted by the State legislature received the assent of the President on 14-2-19-70 and by notification No. 367-653-XXVI-70 dated 17-2-1970 issued under Sub-section (3) of Section 1 thereof, published in Madhya Pradesh Rajpatra dated 172-1970 the enactment was brought into force from 18-2-1970 in all districts of Indore Division in addition to the other areas mentioned therein. Accordingly, with effect from 18-2-1970, the Bal Adhiniyam was applicable to the area with which we are concerned. Admittedly, it was in March, 1972 that the Juvenile Court was constituted under Section 4 of the Bal Adhiniyam for the area in question but from 18-21970 till such constitution of the Juvenile Court for that area, it was the Magistrate First Class for the area, who was vested with the powers conferred on the Juvenile Court by or under the Bal Adhiniyam by virtue of Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Bal Adhiniyam. It is, therefore, clear that all events commencing from the offence in the present case upto the judgment of the Sessions Court were subsequent to the enforcement of the Bal Adhiniyam in that area on li8-2-1970. For this reason there is no dispute that the provisions of the Bal Adhiniyam were applicable to the present case provided the same extended also to the offence of murder with which the appellant is charged. This is so because the appellant was then a child within years.

( 6. ) THE argument in this case depends in turn on the question whether a child charged with the offence of murder, which is punishable with death is also governed by the provisions, of the Bal Adhiniyam. We shall first consider the relevant provisions of the B