Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
31 judgments · newest first · showing 1–31
The appellant, convicted of culpable homicide amounting to murder for a 1994 incident, claimed he was a minor at the time of the offence, asserting a plea of juvenility under s.9(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Despite earlier courts treating him as an adult …
Pawan Kumar was convicted of murder and attempt to murder (IPC ss.302, 307 read with s.34) and sentenced to life imprisonment and seven years rigorous imprisonment. He contended that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence (01‑12‑1995) and sought the benefit of the Juvenile Justice Act. The …
The case concerned the murder of Ganeshram in July 1998, for which Devilal, his son Gokul and Amrat Ram (AR) were charged under IPC s.302 r/w s.34 and the SC/ST Act. The trial court relied on the FIR as a dying declaration and on eyewitness testimony of the victim's wife (PW1) and sister‑in‑law …
The appellant was convicted of murder and assault in 1995 and sentenced to life imprisonment and fines. At the time of the offence he was 17 years, 11 months and 5 days old, i.e., below 18 years. The issue was whether he should be treated as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection …
The appellant was convicted under IPC sections 304B (dowry death) and 498A (cruelty) and sentenced to imprisonment and a fine. He later claimed to have been a juvenile at the time of the offence, asserting an age of 13 years 8 months, but documentary and medical evidence established his age as about …
The appellant, Abuzar Hossain @ Gulam Hossain, claimed that he was a juvenile at the time of the alleged offence and therefore could not be tried in a regular criminal court. The claim was not raised in the trial or earlier appeals, and the question before the Supreme Court was whether a claim of …
The appellant, Babla @ Dinesh, was convicted by a trial court and sentenced to life imprisonment under Sections 302 and 149 of the IPC for a murder committed on 1‑12‑1991. He contended that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, but the High Court rejected the plea on the ground that it was …
Lakhan Lal and Pappu Lal were convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 and sentenced to life imprisonment. At the time of the offence (9 May 1985) they were about 16 years old, i.e., minors under the age of 18. The Supreme Court examined whether they could be treated as juveniles under the …
The appellant Daya Nano was convicted under Sections 376 r.w. and 511 of the IPC for rape and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment. He was 16 years, 5 months and 19 days old at the time of the offence, but the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 came into force …
The petitioner, Remdeo Chauhan, was convicted of murder and sentenced to death, which was later commuted to life imprisonment by the Governor of Assam after a recommendation from the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). Relatives of the victims challenged the commutation, arguing that the NHRC …
The appellant was convicted under Section 307 of the IPC for an offence committed on 6 March 1983, when he was about 15 years old. After serving part of his sentence, he challenged the conviction on the ground that he should be treated as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of …
The appellant, Dharmabir, was convicted of murder and attempted murder committed in August 1991 when he was 16 years, 9 months old. At the time of the offences the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 did not deem him a juvenile, but the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, which …
Vikram Singh was convicted in 1998 for a crime committed on 20‑02‑1996 and sentenced to life imprisonment. He contended that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, being born on 04‑05‑1980, and therefore entitled to the benefits of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, …
Satish @ Dhanna, born on 12‑11‑1980, was convicted under IPC sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 for offences committed when he was under 18 years of age. The appeal questioned whether, after the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 came into force, he could be treated as a …
Eerati Laxman was convicted of murder under s.302 IPC for killing Pittala Chandrakala on 9 May 1994 and sentenced to life imprisonment. He contended that he was a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, claiming his birth date was 10 May 1978, and thus had not attained the age of 16 at the …
In 1993 Ranjit Singh, then about 17 years old, was convicted of murder and related offences under the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed, contending that he was a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and that Section 20 of that Act should …
The appellant Jyoti Prakash Rai was convicted of murder under Section 302 IPC for killing a schoolmate on 12 May 2000. At the time of the offence the trial magistrate estimated his age to be about 17 years, but the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 came into force on 1 …
The appellant, Balu (Bakthavatchalu), was convicted of murder under IPC 302 for an incident that occurred on 20 April 1998. The trial court recorded his age as 18 and rejected his application to be sent to a Borstal School. On appeal, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether he was a …
Sudesh Kumar was convicted under IPC s.392 r/w s.34 and the Arms Act for a robbery committed on 7 March 1981 and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment. He appealed, claiming benefit under Section 6 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, asserting that he was under 21 years of age at the …
The appellant, a mechanic, lured a five‑year‑old girl, took her away and allegedly committed sexual assault, including intercourse through the rectum. The girl identified the accused the next day and a medical report corroborated the assault. The trial court convicted him under IPC sections 363, …
The appellant Jitendra Ram (Jitu) was convicted of murder and abetment of suicide under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. He contended before the Supreme Court that he was a minor at the time of the offence (18‑11‑1985) and therefore entitled to the protection of …
The Supreme Court examined the murder of Kuljit Singh, where the accused Gurpreet Singh and Mohinder Pal Singh, along with others, were convicted under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused shared a common intention to kill, supported by eyewitness …
The Supreme Court examined the appeal of Satbir Singh and others, who were convicted for the dowry death of Shanti Singh under IPC Sections 304‑B, 498‑A and 201. The prosecution proved that Shanti was harassed for additional dowry (Rs 7,000) shortly before her death, that she died within seven years …
An FIR was lodged for murder and related offences committed on 17‑11‑1999. The accused, aged 17 years and 8 months at the time, applied to be treated as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The 1986 Juvenile Justice Act, then in force, defined a male …
The appellant Pratap Singh was charged with offences allegedly committed on 31‑12‑1998 and was produced before the Juvenile Court in 2000. The key issues were whether the age of a juvenile offender should be reckoned as of the date of the offence or the date of production before the court, and …
The appellants were convicted of murder under IPC s.302 read with s.34 for the killing of Hamam Singh. The trial court had acquitted them, relying on the alleged unreliability of witnesses who were relatives of the deceased, the absence of independent shop‑keeper witnesses, a site‑plan omission, and …
The Supreme Court considered a review petition filed by R.D. Chauhan, who claimed he was a juvenile at the time of committing murder under Section 302 IPC and therefore could not be sentenced to death. The petition argued that the trial and appellate courts failed to apply the Juvenile Justice Act, …
Arnit Das was arrested for a murder under IPC 302 and claimed to be a juvenile, asserting a birth date of 18‑09‑1982. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered an enquiry under Section 32 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, and, after a medical board report, concluded that Das was above 16 …
The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ under Article 32 on behalf of Gaurav Jain, seeking rescue, rehabilitation and education for children of prostitutes and an overall scheme to eradicate prostitution. The Court examined the constitutional guarantees under Articles 14, 15, 21, 23, …
Vishal Jeet filed a public‑interest writ petition under Article 32 seeking a CBI inquiry into police negligence, the forced prostitution, Devadasi and Jogini systems, and rehabilitation of victims. The Court observed that prostitution is a socio‑economic problem requiring preventive, not merely …
The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Article 32 seeking relief for delinquent children detained in regular jails, in light of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. The Court noted that earlier reports from District Judges showed significant numbers of juveniles in regular jails across …
