UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND ENERGY

STUDIES

College of Legal Studies

Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand 2005 (3)
SCC 551

Submitted to:
Submitted by:

Dr. Gaurav Kataria,

Gupta
College of Legal Studies,
Semester VI

Aditi
BA LLB
SAP ID- 500012340
Roll No- 7

Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand 2005 (3) SCC 551

Case Analysis

The facts of the case chronologically are mentioned below

01/01/ 1999 An FIR was lodged against Pratap Singh in Bokaro City
regarding the commission of offence to be allegedly occurred on
31.12.1998 under Section 364A, 302/201 read with section 120-B of
IPC, 1860.

22/11/1999 - The accused was arrested and produced before the CJM
Chas who determined his age to be around 18 years.

28/2/2000 - The accused filed a petition before CJM Chas claiming his
age to be below 18 and sought permission to transfer the matter to the
Juvenile Court.

03/03/2000 - The accused was produced before Juvenile Justice Board

(JJB) and the Juvenile Judge assessed the age to be 15-16 years and
asked for medical examination for the same and directed for medical
examination by constituting the medical board for age determination of
the accused.

No such Medical Board was constituted thereafter.

ACJM through the help school certificate and the mark sheet of
secondary board came to the finding that the age of accused at the
time of commission of offence was below 16 yrs and released the
accused on bail.

The informant appealed to the Session Court which upheld the finding
of lower court and then subsequently the informant filed the revision
petition in High Court and the High Court appreciating the decision of
the lower court referred the matter to the constitution bench due to
variance of judicial precedents over the determination of age
of the juvenile and also presence of substantial question in law
regarding conflict of the applicability of 1986 Act and the
2000Act.

As answers to the questions raised by the 5 judge bench

of the Supreme Court

whilst holding that the reckoning date for determination of the age of
the juvenile is the date of offence, observed, It is settled law that the
interpretation of the Statute of beneficial legislation must be to
advance the cause of legislation to the benefit for whom it is made and
not to frustrate the intendment of the legislation.

Courts that once accorded juveniles the benefits of juvenile legislation

are gradually changing their stance.

A claim of juvenility raised for the first time before the Supreme Court
is being looked upon with suspicion.

Death sentences are confirmed inspite of ambiguity as to whether the

convict is a juvenile.

Also highlighted the aims and objectives of the JUVENILE

JUSTICE ACT, 1986 which are as follows(i)

To lay down a uniform legal framework for juvenile justice in the

country so as to ensure that no child under any circumstances is
lodged in jail or police lock-up. This is being ensured by establishing
Juvenile Welfare Boards and Juvenile Courts;

(ii)

To provide for a specialized approach towards the prevention and

treatment of juvenile delinquency in its full range in keeping with
the developmental needs of the child found in any situation of social
maladjustment;

(iii)

To spell out the machinery and infrastructure required for the care,
protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation of various
categories of children coming within the purview of the juvenile
justice system. This is proposed to be achieved by establishing
observation homes, juvenile homes for neglected juveniles and
special homes for delinquent juveniles;

(iv)

To establish norms and standards for the administration of juvenile

justice in terms of investigation and prosecution, adjudication and
disposition, and care, treatment and rehabilitation;

(v)

To develop appropriate linkages and co-ordination between the

formal system of juvenile justice and voluntary agencies engaged in
the welfare of neglected or socially maladjusted children and to
specifically define the areas of their responsibilities and roles;

(vi)

To constitute special offences in relation to juveniles and provide for

punishments.

(vii)

To bring the operation of the juvenile justice system in the country

in conformity with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rule for

the Administration of Juvenile Justice.

With regard to the applicability of Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 over the cases
pending and dealt under the 1986 Act. The Court took reference of
Section 18, 20, 26 ,32 and the preamble of 1986 Act and held that the
benefits offered to the delinquent juveniles under 2000 act must be made
available to them and it has retrospective effect to this extent.

SELF COMMENT:

This is a landmark case with regard to the Juvenile Justice in India and the
determination of the age of the juvenile delinquent and also applicability of the
term juvenile in conflict of law.