Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra, through the Anti-Terrorism Squad, Aurangabad, filed a criminal revision application before the Bombay High Court challenging the judgment and order dated 25th May 2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, in Criminal Appeal No.2 of 2021. That appeal had confirmed the order dated 1st October 2019 of the Juvenile Justice Board, Aurangabad, dismissing the State's application (Exhibit 25) in J.C.No.160 of 2019. The State sought to have the juvenile respondent, Shadab Tabarak Khan, tried as an adult for alleged terrorist activities. The facts leading to the case are that in the last week of August 2018, Officer Vijay Shankarlal Jaiswal of the Anti-Terrorist Squad received secret information that certain persons had engaged in terrorist activities in Mumbra and Aurangabad areas. The juvenile was apprehended and proceedings were initiated before the Juvenile Justice Board. The Board, after conducting a preliminary assessment under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, declined to try the juvenile as an adult. The State appealed to the Sessions Court, which dismissed the appeal. The State then filed the present revision. The legal issue before the High Court was whether the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board under Section 15 of the JJ Act is amenable to revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The State argued that the order was final and revisable. The respondent contended that the order was interlocutory and not revisable. The High Court analyzed the provisions of the JJ Act, particularly Sections 15, 19, and 101, and held that the order under Section 15 is a preliminary assessment and not a final order. The court observed that the remedy against such an order lies under Section 19 of the JJ Act by way of an appeal before the Children's Court, and not by revision under Section 397 CrPC. The court further noted that even if revision were maintainable, the order was interlocutory and barred under Section 397(2) CrPC. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the revision application as not maintainable, upholding the orders of the lower courts.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Revision - Maintainability - Section 397 CrPC - Preliminary Assessment under Section 15 of Juvenile Justice Act - The order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, is a preliminary assessment and not a final order. Such an order is not amenable to revision under Section 397 of CrPC as it does not terminate the proceedings. The remedy against such an order lies under Section 19 of the JJ Act by way of an appeal before the Children's Court. (Paras 5-8) B) Juvenile Justice - Preliminary Assessment - Section 15 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 - The Board's assessment regarding the child's mental and physical capacity to commit an offence and the need for trial as an adult is a preliminary step. The Board's order declining to try the juvenile as an adult does not amount to a final order and cannot be challenged in revision. (Paras 5-8) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Revision - Interlocutory Order - Section 397(2) CrPC - The order under Section 15 of the JJ Act is an interlocutory order as it does not decide the rights of the parties finally. Hence, revision under Section 397 CrPC is barred. (Para 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, declining to try the juvenile as an adult, is amenable to revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the criminal revision application as not maintainable, holding that the order under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, is a preliminary assessment and not a final order, and therefore not amenable to revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The court upheld the orders of the Juvenile Justice Board and the Sessions Court.
Law Points
- Revision against preliminary assessment under Section 15 of JJ Act not maintainable
- Section 397 CrPC scope
- Juvenile Justice Act 2015 Section 15
- Section 19 of JJ Act
- Section 101 of JJ Act
