Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
31 judgments · newest first · showing 1–31
The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against a High Court order that granted bail to the accused Anurudh and directed that a medical board determine the victim's age in all POCSO cases. The accused was charged under IPC sections 363 and 366 and POCSO sections 7 and 8 for allegedly abducting a …
The case concerns the murder of a ten‑year‑old boy, Muntiyaz Ali, whose body was found on 6 June 2007. The appellants Nazim, Aftab and Arman were convicted under Sections 302, 201 and 120‑B IPC based largely on the testimony of three prosecution witnesses and circumstantial evidence. The Supreme …
The appellant Suresh alleged that his paternal uncle and the uncle's son, Respondent No.2, forcibly entered his house and the son shot his brother Rajesh, resulting in death. Respondent No.2 claimed juvenility, asserting he was 16 years old at the time, based on a school transfer certificate from …
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 …
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 …
The appellant XYZ, a minor, alleged that she was gang‑raped by the first respondent ABHISHEIK and others. The FIR was lodged on 24 July 2015. The accused claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence and produced a matriculation certificate, a school birth register entry and a municipal birth …
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 …
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 …
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 …
The appellant Raju was convicted along with two others for gang-rape under IPC s.376(2)(g) and appealed, claiming he was a juvenile at the time of the offence. The High Court rejected his claim, finding insufficient evidence, and upheld the conviction. The Supreme Court directed its Registrar …
Parag Bhat, alleged to be a juvenile, claimed minority based on school certificates, but the certificates were found forged or doubtful. The Juvenile Justice Board, after noting the discrepancies, referred the matter to a medical board which, through ossification tests, determined the appellant to …
The State of Madhya Pradesh prosecuted Anoop Singh for kidnapping, assault and rape of a girl, alleging she was under 16 years old at the time of the offence. The trial court convicted Singh based on the girl’s birth certificate and middle‑school examination certificate, despite a two‑day …
Mahesh Jogi was convicted for an offence committed on 20 January 1985 when he was 17 years and 4 months old. The conviction and sentence were imposed before the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 came into force. The Supreme Court was asked to determine whether Jogi …
Shabnam Hashmi filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking a declaration that the right to adopt and to be adopted is a fundamental right under Article 21 and that adoption should be permitted irrespective of religion, caste or creed. The petition also asked the Union of India to enact an …
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 Jarnail Singh was convicted under IPC sections 366, 376(g) and 120‑B for kidnapping and raping a girl who was later found to be a minor. The Supreme Court examined the prosecution's evidence, including the victim's statements under Section 164 CrPC, forensic reports, and corroboration …
Bharat Bhushan was convicted by the Himachal Pradesh High Court for raping an 11‑year‑old girl under IPC s.376 and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine. He contended that, being a juvenile (under 18) at the time of the offence, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of …
Stephanie Joan Becker, an American citizen, applied under Sections 7 and 26 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, to be appointed guardian of a 10‑year‑old Indian orphan named Tina and to take her abroad for adoption. The trial court and the Delhi High Court rejected the applications, holding that …
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, Ashwani Kumar Saxena, was convicted of murder under IPC s.302 r.w. s.27 Arms Act and appealed, claiming he was a juvenile at the time of the offence (19‑Oct‑2008). He produced school mark‑sheets and the school admission register showing a birth date of 24‑Oct‑1990, while the trial …
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 …
Vijay Singh was convicted under Section 307 IPC for stabbing PW‑4 on 11‑03‑1998 and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment. He later claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence, relying on a school leaving certificate showing a date of birth of 01‑12‑1981, which would make him 16 …
Amit Singh was convicted of multiple offences, including murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment. He filed a writ petition under Article 32, claiming that he was a juvenile (under 18) at the time of the offence on 1 May 1999, based on his birth certificate and school records showing a birth date …
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 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 …
Mohan Mali and another were convicted under IPC sections 302, 324 and 326 and sentenced to life imprisonment. One co‑accused, Dhanna Lal (appellant No.2), claimed he was a juvenile at the time of the offence. The Supreme Court examined the provisions of 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 …
Hari Ram was arrested in 1998 for offences under the IPC and the trial court initially held him to be a juvenile (under 16) and sent the case to the Juvenile Justice Board. The Rajasthan High Court later held he was over 16 and applied the 1986 Juvenile Act, rejecting the claim of juvenility. On …
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, …
