Hypertechnical approach should not be taken when Accused produces evidence for establishing Juvenility : Kerala High Court
The High Court of Kerala, through learned judge, Justice Badharudeen in the case Arjun Reghu v. State of Kerala & Anr. (CRL.MC NO. 599 OF 2021) held that hypertechnical approach should not be taken when Accused produces evidence for establishing Juvenility.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE: In this writ petition, the petitioner, initiated proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash all further proceedings against him pending before the Assistant Sessions Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that as on the date of occurrence of the crime, the petitioner was aged 15 years and 9 months, therefore, the petitioner should have been dealt under Section 6 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and the relevant provisions to deal with a juvenile. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, a private complaint was lodged based on false allegations, arraying the petitioner as a person, aged 26 years, among other accused alleging commission of offences under Sections 324, 326, 308 r/w 34 I.P.C.
JUDGEMENT: After hearing the contentions raised by both the parties, the court observed that “In view of the above settled law, the question of juvenility raised by the petitioner herein has to be considered by the Assistant Sessions Judge as provided under Section 9(2) and (3) of the J.J Act. In view of the matter, the proceedings before the Assistant Sessions Judge in so far as the petitioner is concerned, is reverted back to the stage before Section 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the proceedings subsequent to that stage shall stand quashed”. The court directed the Sessions Judge to decide the plea of juvenility raised by the petitioner within 2 months.
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY – AMRUTHA K