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

2026 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 77594

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, Sukhvinder Kaur, JJ
R.... – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER – Respondent
CRA-D-552-2026 (O&M)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: V.P. Sangwan
For the Respondents: Karan Sharma

A court trying a child as an adult for murder under Section 302 IPC cannot award a sentence less than life imprisonment; however, pursuant to Section 21 of the JJ Act 2015, such life imprisonment must be awarded with the possibility of release.

Headnote:The case involves the interpretation of Section 19 and 21 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, and Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. A child in conflict with law (CCL), tried as an adult, was convicted of offenses under Sections 506 and 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The trial court sentenced the appellant to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for the offense of murder. The court found that this sentence was contrary to the statutory mandate of Section 302 IPC, which only provides for death or life imprisonment. The primary issue is whether a trial court can award a sentence less than life imprisonment for murder when trying a child as an adult. The court reasoned that while Section 21 of the JJ Act prohibits sentencing a child to death or life imprisonment without the possibility of release, it does not empower the court to award a sentence not prescribed by the substantive law (Section 302 IPC). The court held that the only permissible sentence for murder in such cases is life imprisonment, provided it is specified that there is a possibility of release. appeal is partly allowed to the extent mentioned above.

Table of Content
1. identification of a fundamental sentencing defect in the trial of a child as an adult. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. reconciliation of mandatory sentencing under section 302 ipc with the restrictive provisions of section 21 of the jj act. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. judicial consensus that sentences less than life imprisonment for murder are legally unsustainable. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. necessity of remanding the case for correct sentencing to prevent prejudice to the accused. (Para 16 , 17 , 18)

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

FIR No. 638 Dated 05.11.2022 Police Station City Bhiwani Sections 294, 302, 506 r/w 34 IPC
Criminal Case Number in the Trial Court SC/47/2023
CNR No. HRBH010024562023
Date of Decision 10/13.03.2026
Convict’s name Penal provision Sentence
Rxxxxx 506 r/w 34 IPC RI for 06 months with a fine of Rs. 200/-
302 r/w 34 IPC RI for 10 years with a fine of Rs. 5000/-

1. Challenging the above captioned judgment of conviction and sentence, the convict, who is a CCL, has come up before this Court by filing the present criminal appeal.

2. We have heard counsel for the appellant and State, and instead of admitting the matter for final hearing, we have noticed one fundamental defect which must be addressed at the initial stage itself, because if not cured at this stage, it would further delay proceedings, put the convict in a queue which would be later than that of today, and serve no purpose.

3. The fundamental defect that is noticeable is in the sentencing portion of the impugned judgment. As per the impugned judgment, the appellant was treated as a child but was tried as an Adult as mandated in §19 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter called the ‘JJ Act’) in the above captioned trial. The trial Court held the present appellant guilty of the commission of offenses punishable under §§506 and 302, read with §34 of the IPC.

4. The learned trial Judge heard the child on the quantum of sentence and vide a separate order dated March 13, 2026, sentenced the child under §506 r/w 34 IPC for RI for 06 months and a fine of Rs. 200/-, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo a simple imprisonment for one week. We are not stating anything regarding this portion of the sentence.

5. The problematic and illegal portion is the next sentence under §302, read with 34 IPC. The learned trial Judge imposed a sentence of RI for a period of 10 years and directed payment of a fine of Rs. 5000/-, and, in default of payment of the fine, the convict shall further undergo simple imprisonment for 03 months. On the face of it, this sentence is contrary to the basic statutory provision of §302 IPC, which provides for only two sentences, i.e., either life imprisonment or death. Nowhere is it mentioned that under §302 IPC, the sentence can be for 10 years.

6. It shall be relevant to extract the following provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter called the ‘JJ Act’):

19. Powers of Children’s Court.—(1) After the receipt of preliminary assessment from the Board under section 15, the Children’s Court may decide that—

(i) there is a need for trial of the child as an adult as per the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) and pass appropriate orders after trial subject to the provisions of this section and section 21, considering the special needs of the child, the tenets of fair trial and maintaining a child friendly atmosphere;

(ii) there is no need for trial of the child as an adult and may conduct an inquiry as a Board and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the provisions of section 18.

(2) The Children’s Court shall ensure that the final order, with regard to a child in conflict with law, shall include an individual care plan for the rehabilitation of child, including follow up by the probation officer or the District Child Protection Unit or a social worker.

(3) The Children’s Court shall ensur

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