Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015

43 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusRAMESH BISHNOI

2019 INSC 130229 November 2019Dismissed

Ramesh Bishnoi was selected for the post of Sub‑Inspector in the CISF and disclosed an FIR from 2009 alleging offences under IPC sections 354, 447 and 509 that were committed when he was a minor. He was acquitted in 2011 due to lack of evidence, but the screening committee cancelled his appointment on the ground of the

AJAY MALIKversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ANR.

2025 INSC 11829 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from FIR No. 60/2017 alleging wrongful confinement, trafficking and conspiracy against Ajay Malik for employing a tribal domestic worker. Malik sought quashing of the criminal proceedings and compounding of the offences, supported by a no‑objection affidavit from the complainant, while the State opposed

SAMPURNA BEHRUAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 111027 November 2018Directions issued

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition under Article 32 seeking implementation of various protective measures for children under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act, 2015. The Court noted that the Ministry of Women and Child Development was still preparing a Standard Operating Procedure (S

NARAYAN CHETANRAM CHAUDHARYversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2023 INSC 29827 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, convicted and sentenced to death for the 1994 murder of five women and two children, claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, asserting an age of 12 years based on school birth certificates and other documents. After earlier petitions were dismissed, the Supreme Court referred the matter to

SANJEEV KUMAR GUPTAversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

2019 INSC 81625 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Sanjeev Kumar Gupta, alleged that his son was murdered and that the accused, the second respondent, was a juvenile at the time of the offence. The accused claimed juvenility based on a CBSE matriculation certificate showing a birth date of 17‑12‑1998, while school records, a transfer certificate, Aadhaar

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ETC.versusANKUR GUPTA & ORS.

2019 INSC 26425 February 2019Disposed off

The respondents, Ankur Gupta and Geetika Agarwal, applied to adopt a child in India on 19 July 2016 as Indian prospective adoptive parents, although Geetika was already a U.S. citizen and Ankur later acquired U.S. citizenship on 5 December 2016. After obtaining foreign citizenship, they were re‑registered as Overseas C

SAROJ & ORS.versusIFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. & ORS.

2024 INSC 81624 October 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The deceased Silak Ram died in a motorcycle accident on 4 August 2015. His family filed a claim before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) which awarded Rs 19,35,400 with 7.5% interest. The Punjab & Haryana High Court reduced the award to Rs 9,22,336, relying on the deceased’s age as 47 years derived from his Aad

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusRAMJI LAL SHARMA & ANOTHER

2024 INSC 74723 September 2024Case Allowed

The respondents were convicted for murder and related offences arising from an incident on 17 January 2002. After being acquitted by the High Court, the Supreme Court restored the conviction in 2022, and the accused served more than four years of imprisonment. The accused then filed a miscellaneous application claiming

IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus

2025 INSC 77822 May 2025

The Supreme Court examined a criminal appeal filed by the State of West Bengal challenging a High Court order that had set aside the conviction of an accused under the POCSO Act and IPC for raping a 14‑year‑old girl who later married him and bore a child. The Court restored the conviction for offences under Section 6 o

S.C. NARANGversusSTATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

2025 INSC 68822 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

A four‑year‑old girl studying in the nursery class of Maxfort School, Delhi, alleged that a classmate sexually assaulted her. A charge‑sheet was filed under Section 21 of the POCSO Act read with Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act against the school principal, two teachers and the V

THIRUMOORTHYversusSTATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2024 INSC 24722 March 2024Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a 17‑year‑old at the time of the 2016 offence, was identified as a Child in Conflict with Law (CICL) but the charge sheet was filed directly before a Sessions Court without referral to a Juvenile Justice Board (JJB). The trial court convicted him under sections of the IPC and the POCSO Act and sentenced

PAWAN KUMARversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2023 INSC 101221 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

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 trial court and High Co

GANGADHAR NARAYAN NAYAK @ GANGADHAR HIREGUTTIversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2022 INSC 31821 March 2022Matter referred to larger bench

The appellant, an editor, published a news report disclosing the name of a 16‑year‑old girl who was a victim of sexual harassment, leading to a complaint under Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO). The police investigated, filed a charge‑sheet and the Special Court took cognizance,

IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus

2024 INSC 61420 August 2024Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined a criminal appeal filed by the State of West Bengal against a High Court order that set aside the conviction of a 25‑year‑old accused under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 376(2)(n) and 376(3) of the IPC for raping a 14‑year‑old girl who later gave birth to his child. The Court held t

MRS. KANIKA GOELversusSTATE OF DELHI THROUGH S.H.O. AND ANR.

2018 INSC 62220 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a US‑born minor girl, M, whose mother (the appellant) fled the United States with her to India and filed for divorce. The father (respondent No.2) obtained a US custody order and sought a writ of habeas corpus in Delhi to have the child returned to the US. The Delhi High Court ordered her return, but

MAATR SPARSH AN INITIATIVE BY AVYAAN FOUNDATIONversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2025 INSC 30219 February 2025Disposed off

The NGO Avyaan Foundation filed a public‑interest writ seeking a mandamus directing the Union and State governments to construct feeding and child‑care rooms in public places for nursing mothers. The petition argued that lack of such facilities infringes the fundamental rights of mothers and children, invoking Article

RISHIPAL SINGH SOLANKIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2021 INSC 75218 November 2021Dismissed

The appellant alleged that respondent No.2, Nishant Solanki, who was charged with serious offences including murder, was not a juvenile and challenged the Juvenile Justice Board's (JJ Board) declaration that he was a juvenile delinquent based on his matriculation certificate. The appellant argued that the admission for

SOCIETY FOR ENLIGHTENMENT AND VOLUNTARY ACTION & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 79018 October 2024Disposed off

The Society for Enlightenment and Voluntary Action, an NGO, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking comprehensive guidelines for the effective implementation of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (PCMA), including the appointment of exclusive Child Marriage Prohibition Officers (CMPOs) and support mecha

P. YUVAPRAKASHversusSTATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

2023 INSC 67618 July 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Yuvaprakash was accused of kidnapping a 17‑year‑old girl M, solemnising a marriage with her and having sexual intercourse. The victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC claimed she eloped voluntarily and was in love with the appellant. The trial court convicted him under Section 6 of the POCSO Act, Sectio

SUPRIYO @ SUPRIYA CHAKRABORTY & ANRversusUNION OF INDIA

2023 INSC 92017 October 2023Disposed off

The Supreme Court of India considered a batch of petitions seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and other laws. The Court held that there is no fundamental right to marry under the Constitution, and the Special Marriage Act is not unconstitutional for excluding same-sex c

THE STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR (NOW U.T. OF JAMMU & KASHMIR) & ORS.versusSHUBAM SANGRA

2022 INSC 120516 November 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appeal arose from the Kathua gang‑rape case where the accused Shubam Sangra claimed to be a juvenile. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, relying on municipal and parental testimony, held him a minor, a decision affirmed by the High Court. The State appealed, arguing that contradictory documentary evidence required refe

MANOJ @ MONU @ VISHAL CHAUDHARYversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR

2022 INSC 18615 February 2022Dismissed

The appellant, Manoj @ Monu @ Vishal Chaudhary, was initially declared a juvenile in conflict with law but the High Court set aside that finding and ordered him to stand trial as an adult. He sought to prove his juvenility on the basis of a birth certificate, a school leaving certificate, an ossification test report, a

BACHPAN BACHAO ANDOLANversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2016 INSC 112414 December 2016Disposed off

Bachpan Bachao Andolan filed a public‑interest writ petition under Article 32 seeking a mandamus directing the Union of India to devise and implement a national action plan to curb drug, alcohol and substance abuse among children. The Court noted the alarming rise in substance use among India’s 44 crore children and th

PINKIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR.

2025 INSC 48214 April 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined appeals filed by the victims of an interstate child‑trafficking racket challenging the High Court's grant of bail to thirteen accused persons charged under IPC sections 363, 311 and 370(5). The Court found that the High Court had ignored crucial factors such as the seriousness of the offence,

BARUN CHANDRA THAKURversusMASTER BHOLU & ANR.

2022 INSC 71613 July 2022Dismissed

The case concerns a 16‑year‑old accused (Bholu) of murder, whose preliminary assessment under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 was held by the Juvenile Justice Board to warrant trial as an adult. The Board relied on a psychologist’s IQ report and a Social Investigation Repo

NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR PROTECTION OF CHILD RIGHTS & ORS.versusDR. RAJESH KUMAR & ORS.

2020 INSC 3513 January 2020Disposed off

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) took cognizance of media reports of large‑scale child trafficking in Jalpaiguri, West Bengal, and sought information from the state police and the West Bengal Commission for Protection of Child Rights (WBCPCR). The Additional Director General of Police (ADG

REENA BANERJEE AND ANOTHERversusGOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 110112 September 2025Directions issued

The petitioners, a charitable trust and an individual, sought enforcement of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016 to improve conditions in state‑run care homes for persons with cognitive disabilities, citing overcrowding, inadequate health care, abuse and lack of education. The Court examined whethe

VINOD KATARAversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

2022 INSC 94912 September 2022Directions issued

Vinod Katara, convicted to life imprisonment for murder in 1982, later claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence based on a medical board report and a Family Register showing a birth year of 1968. He filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking relief under Section 7A of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Prot

DASARI ANIL KUMAR & ANOTHERversusTHE CHILD WELFARE PROJECT DIRECTOR & OTHERS

2025 INSC 97212 August 2025Disposed off

The appellants, who had adopted four minor girls under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, had their custody seized by police on the basis of an FIR and the children were placed under the Child Welfare Project Director. The appellants challenged the police action, arguing it was illegal and violated Articles

NIPUN SAXENA & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 119211 December 2018Disposed off

The Supreme Court addressed the protection of identity of victims of sexual offences, both adult and child, under IPC s.228A, CrPC s.327 and the POCSO Act. It held that no person may publish the victim's name or any detail that could lead to identification, and FIRs relating to such offences must not be placed in the p

BARUN CHANDRA THAKURversusCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND OTHERS

2017 INSC 121411 December 2017Dismissed

The appellant, a grieving father, challenged the grant of anticipatory and interim bail to the top management executives of Ryan International School, who were accused in the murder of his 7‑year‑old son. The respondents filed bail applications in the Bombay High Court and later in the Punjab & Haryana High Court, whic

INDEPENDENT THOUGHTversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2017 INSC 103011 October 2017Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined whether Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which exempts a husband from rape liability when his wife is aged 15‑18, violates the Constitution and conflicts with the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The Court held that the exemption creates an arbitrar

NARESH @ NEHRUversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2023 INSC 8899 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC for the murder of Ajay based primarily on the testimony of PW‑9, a cousin of the deceased, and a CCTV video. The Supreme Court examined the reliability of the eyewitness, finding his statements riddled with inconsistencies, no prior identi

SAMPURNA BEHURAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2018 INSC 1259 February 2018Disposed off

Sampurna Behura filed a public‑interest writ petition under Article 32 seeking the implementation of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Acts of 2000 and 2015, alleging that many states had failed to establish or properly staff Child Welfare Committees, Juvenile Justice Boards, Special Juvenile Polic

SHILPA MITTALversusSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

2020 INSC 259 January 2020Disposed off

A juvenile aged between 16 and 18 was alleged to have committed homicide under IPC section 304, an offence with a maximum punishment of life imprisonment but no prescribed minimum sentence. The Juvenile Justice Board classified the offence as "heinous" and ordered the juvenile to be tried as an adult, a decision later

CHILD IN CONFLICT WITH LAW THROUGH HIS MOTHERversusTHE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER

2024 INSC 3877 May 2024Disposed off

The appeal was filed by a child in conflict with law (CCL) challenging a High Court order that set aside a Juvenile Justice Board's order directing his trial as an adult in a Children’s Court. The key issues were whether the three‑month period for completing a preliminary assessment under s.14(3) of the Juvenile Justic

AMANATULLAH KHANversusTHE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, DELHI & ORS.

2024 INSC 3837 May 2024

The appellant, Amanatullah Khan, challenged the inclusion of his minor children and wife in a police "History Sheet" that alleged his bad character, arguing that there was no adverse material against them. The Delhi High Court dismissed his writ petition under Article 226 and Section 482 of the CrPC, prompting an appea

OM PRAKASH @ ISRAEL @ RAJU @ RAJU DASversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2025 INSC 437 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

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 based on a bank‑accou

RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONSversusRE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS

2017 INSC 9555 February 2016

The Supreme Court entertained Writ Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2013 concerning inhuman conditions in 1,382 Indian prisons. Relying on earlier decisions, the Court affirmed that prisoners are persons entitled to fundamental rights, including dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. It examined the persistent proble

RE- INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS (JI)versus.

2017 INSC 9553 October 2016Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition highlighting severe overcrowding in 1,382 Indian prisons, with occupancy exceeding 150% of permissible limits, and the failure of prison authorities to implement earlier court directions. The Court noted the absence of a juvenile custody manual under the Juvenile Justice (Care

MUMTAZ @ MUNTYAZversusSTATE OF U.P. (NOW UTTARAKHAND)

2016 INSC 4831 July 2016Disposed off

The appellants Mumtaz alias Muntyaz and Dilshad alias Pappu were convicted under Sections 302 and 34 IPC for setting fire to the victim Pawan Kumar, who later died of burn injuries. The prosecution relied on eyewitness testimony and a dying declaration recorded by a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, which was endorsed by a do

B.N. JOHNversusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2025 INSC 41 January 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, B.N. John, owned a hostel for underprivileged children and alleged that officials raided it illegally on 3 June 2015, falsely accusing him of assaulting them. An FIR was lodged under IPC s.353, and a charge‑sheet later added s.186, leading the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) to take cognizance and issue

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search