Dina Nath @ Daulat vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.16 OF 2008

DINA NATH @ DAULAT Appellant (s)

VERSUS

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondent(s)

JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J.

The only point urged in support of the appeal is that the appellant was

minor within the meaning of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)

Act, 2000 (in short "2000 Act"). Reference is also made to the amendment of the

expression "juvenile in conflict with law" in terms of Section 2(l) as amended by Act

33 of 2006 with effect from 22.8.2006. Reference is also made to the explanation

appended to Section 20 by the said amendment. It is the stand of the appellant that

on the date of occurrence he was minor as his date of birth is 6.3.1973.

Learned counsel for the respondent states that this plea was not raised

either before the trial court or before the High Court by the appellant. The

question about the applicability of 2000 Act and the amendment thereto has to be

tested on the basis of the evidence. Though certain documents have been filed to

substantiate their stand that the appellant was a minor on the date of occurrence i.e.

on 15.6.1990, the applicability of the amended provisions have to be considered. In

the peculiar facts of this case, we set aside the impugned judgment of the High

Court and remit the matter to the trial court to decide only the question as to

whether the appellant was a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence i.e. on 2

15.6.1990. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of

the case. The trial court shall permit the accused appellant to produce such

evidence as is considered necessary by him to substantiate the aforesaid plea.

Similar shall be the case in case of prosecution.

As the matter is pending since long, let the adjudication be done by the

end of September, 2009. The accused-appellant shall continue to remain in custody

till the adjudication is done by the trial court.

We make it clear that the impugned judgment is being set aside only for

the purpose of adjudicating the plea raised by the appellant that he was minor at

the time of commission of the offence.

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

.....................J. (Dr. Arijit Pasayat)

.....................J. (Asok Kumar Ganguly) New Delhi;

April 23, 2009.