PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
X
Vs.
State of Haryana
Date of Decision: 12.07.2023
CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat
FACT:
The individual appealing, known as the “Child In conflict with Law” (abbreviated as “CCL”), has submitted this appeal according to Section-101 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of the Children) Act 2015 (referred to as the “Act”). The purpose of the appeal is to contest the decision issued on 28.10.2022 by the Court of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge in Faridabad.
On the evening of 02.12.2020, the complainant received a call from his neighbor Rohit, informing him that his brother Mahabir was surrounded and being beaten by a group of boys in Budh Bazar, Surya Vihar. He rushed to the scene where he met Mahabir’s friend Kartik, who informed him that Mahabir had been injured with a knife. Mahabir was initially taken to Shivalik Hospital but was later referred to B.K Hospital and then QRG Hospital, where he was declared dead. Kartik stated that Mahabir had a fight with Raunak, Hemant, and Abhishek earlier. They had slapped Mahabir and Raunak had stabbed him with a knife in the face and abdomen. Mahabir’s friends, including Saurav and Manoj, tried to intervene but were also threatened with the knife. The complainant registered an FIR with these allegations, accusing Raunak and others of killing Mahabir.
COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION:
In the current situation, it appears that the Children’s Court dismissed the application without considering the legal requirement of Section 12 of the “Act.” While the appellant/CCL was ordered to be treated as an adult for trial, they are still legally considered a juvenile in conflict with the law and should not be deprived of the protections provided by Section 12 of the “Act.” Furthermore, it is evident that Kartik, Saurav, and Manoj were purported witnesses to the incident. However, their testimonies reveal an inability to positively identify the appellant. Additionally, even Dalip Kumar, a witness to the recovery process, declined to support the prosecution’s case, asserting that no recovery took place in his presence and that the police obtained his signature on blank documents. It is also not disputed that the appellant in question was apprehended on 07.12.2020 and remains in custody, potentially exposing them to association with known criminals and violating their right to a speedy trial as guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Based on the above discussion, the present appeal has been granted.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Srijan Gargx-v-state-of-haryana-484277
