Patna High Court
MUNNA KUSHWAHAversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
Holding
The Special Judge’s trial of the juvenile as an adult without a mandatory preliminary assessment by the Juvenile Justice Board was unlawful, and the conviction and sentence are set aside.
Summary
The appellant, a juvenile aged 17 at the time of the alleged offence, was convicted by a Special Judge of rape under IPC Section 376(3) and aggravated sexual assault under POCSO Section 6 and sentenced to twenty years’ rigorous imprisonment. The conviction was based on the victim’s testimony and medical evidence. The appellant challenged the conviction, arguing that the Special Judge violated the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 by trying him as an adult without the mandatory preliminary assessment by a Juvenile Justice Board under Section 15. The High Court held that the Special Judge erred in bypassing the Board and that the procedural safeguards of Sections 15 and 19 of the JJ Act were not complied with. Consequently, the Court set aside the conviction and sentence, remitted the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board for a proper assessment, and directed the trial court to forward the records. The appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the Special Judge was authorized to try a juvenile as an adult without a preliminary assessment by the Juvenile Justice Board under Section 15 of the JJ Act.
- Whether the conviction and sentence under IPC Section 376(3) and POCSO Section 6 are vitiated by non‑compliance with the procedural requirements of the Juvenile Justice Act.
Legislation cited
- Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 313
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376(3)
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 12(12), 12(13), 15, 18, 19, 21, 9(2), 9(3)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 6
Subjects
- juvenile justice
- POCSO
- rape
- preliminary assessment
- adult trial of child offender
- IPC 376
- Section 6 POCSO
- Section 15 JJ Act
- Section 19 JJ Act
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.720 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-299 Year-2018 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Accused.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Father of the victim.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Udit Narain Singh, Adv.
Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, A.P.P.
For the Pvt. Respondent : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Sitesh Kashyap, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD)
Date : 11-02-2026
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel
for the informant.
2. The present criminal appeal has been preferred
against the judgment of conviction dated 09.05.2023
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) and the
order of sentence dated 16.05.2023 (hereinafter referred to as
the ‘impugned order’) passed by the learned court of 1 st
Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Children Court, District,
Bettiah, West Champaran in Special Case No. 15 of 2018, CIS
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
2/21
No. POCSO 48 of 2018. By the impugned judgment of
conviction, the appellant has been convicted for the offences
punishable under Section 376(3) of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences
Act, 2012 (in short ‘POCSO Act’) and vide impugned order of
sentence, he has been directed to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of twenty years with a fine of Rs.
20,000 (Twenty thousand) under Section 376(3) of the Indian
Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and in default of payment of the
fine, the appellant shall undergo simple imprisonment further
for a period of six months.
Prosecution Case.
3. The prosecution case is based on written information
furnished by the father of the victim girl (X) on 11.07.2018 at
7:00 A.M. to the Station House Officer of Manjhauliya Police
Station, district- West Champaran. In his written information
(Exhibit-1), the informant (P.W.-3) has alleged as under:-
“That on 10.07.2018 in the night, Barat had come near his
house and his minor daughter along with his wife had gone to
watch the Barat and returned back in the night at 1:00 A.M.
while he was sleeping at the Machan situated at his door. On
seeing them, he instructed them to sit on the Machan and he
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
3/21
went to see the Barat where both of them slept. While they were
sleeping on the Machan, the appellant, Munna Kushwaha at
about 1:30 A.M. in the night, came there and taken her minor
daughter towards the east of his house near the field of his
brother, Mahendra Mukhiya and committed rape upon her and
fled away leaving her in unconscious condition in the field.
When the daughter of the informant came to her mother, she
woke up and narrated the entire occurrence and thereafter she
called him.”
4. It appears from the record that after investigation of the
case, based on the materials collected in course of investigation,
police submitted a charge-sheet under Sections 376 of the I.P.C.
and Section 6 of the POCSO Act against the sole accused-
appellant on 02.09.2018.
5. Upon submission of charge-sheet, the learned
Additional District & Sessions Judge-1st -cum- Special Judge,
(POCSO) took cognizance of the offences vide order dated
04.09.2018 and the matter was posted on 15.09.2018 for supply
of police paper, framing of charge and determination of age of
the accused.
6. On 15.09.2018, learned Special Judge considered the
records produced on behalf of the accused which included the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
4/21
provisional certificate of the Bihar School Examination Board
showing that the date of birth of the accused was 17.02.2001.
The date of occurrence being 10.07.2018, the learned Special
Judge held that the accused was 17 years 4 months and 24 days
on the date of occurrence. Thus, according to the learned
Special Judge, the accused was less than 18 years of age.
Having said so, the learned Court proceeded to observe that the
accused is more than 16 years old and he has committed heinous
offence, his mental condition and physical condition were
observed by the learned Court and it was found that he was able
to understand the circumstances and the result of commission of
offence.
With this finding on the record in the order 15.09.2018,
the learned Special Judge directed that the case would be tried
before the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Bettiah, West Champaran, Special Judge (POCSO). It was also
observed that on the said date, the Children’s Court was not
available.
7. The charges were explained in Hindi to the sole
accused-appellant who denied the charges and claimed to be
tried. The learned trial court framed charges against the
appellant-accused under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 6 of
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
5/21
the POCSO Act vide order dated 22.09.2018.
8. The prosecution in order to prove its charges examined
altogether five (5) witnesses and exhibited several documentary
evidences. The description of the prosecution witnesses and the
exhibits are given hereunder in tabular form:
List of prosecution witnesses.
P.W.-1 Victim
P.W.-2 Mother of the victim.
P.W.-3 Father of the victim, informant.
P.W.-4 Dr. Rashmi Nand Huliya
P.W.-5 Ranveer Kumar Jha
List of documentary evidence.
Exhibit No. Description of the Exhibit
1 Signature of informant on written
application.
2 Medical Report of victim.
2/a Signature of Dr. Rashmi on medical
report.
2/b Signature of Dr. Akansha on medical
report.
2/c Signature of Dr. Usha Das on medical
report.
3 Endorsement made by SHO Ranvir on
the written report.
3/a Signature of SHO Ranvir on the written
report.
4 Formal F.I.R.
5 Report of FSL.
5/a Signature of I.O. on report of FSL.
6 Seizure list of victim cloths.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
6/21
6/a Signature of I.O. on seizure list of
victim cloths.
7 Receiving of FSL.
8 FSL report.
9. The statement of the accused was recorded under
Section 313 Cr.P.C., he pleaded innocence. The defence has
produced one witness as D.W.-1, Ravindra Sah.
Finding of the Trial Court.
10. The learned trial court considering the totality of the
circumstances appearing on the record held that evidence of
P.W.-2 is worthy of credence and reliable and there is no reason
to disbelieve the victim and the entire evidence of the
prosecution importantly the victim, the prosecution succeeded to
prove the ingredients of committal of rape & aggravated
penetrative sexual assault of the child victim aged seven years
by the Juvenile accused.
11. The learned Special Judge on the careful scrutiny of
the materials available on record found that the prosecution has
succeeded in proving the charge of rape and aggravated
penetrative sexual assault committed by the Juvenile accused of
the child victim aged about seven years beyond all reasonable
doubts and has also found that the prosecution has produced
reliable and cogent evidence in support of the charges framed
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
7/21
under Section 376(3) of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO
Act against the appellant-accused and the defence has failed in
creating any dent to the prosecution case and also failed to rebut
the presumption. Further the learned Special Judge held the
accused guilty of the charges under Section 376(3) of the IPC
and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
Submission on behalf of the appellant.
12. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
while assessing the age of the accused, the learned Special
Judge exceeded his power and authority under the law. Sub-
section (2) of Section 9 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the
‘J.J. Act’) confers power upon the Court other than a Board to
determine the age of the person who is a child or was a child on
the date of commission of the offence. In this regard, the Court
may form its opinion on its own or can make an inquiry, take
evidence (but not an affidavit) to determine the age of the
person but once the learned Court determines the age and
recorded that the accused is a child within the meaning of
Section 2 (12) of the J.J. Act, by virtue of sub-section (3) of
Section 9 of the J.J. Act, the Court was obliged to forward the
child to the Board for passing appropriate orders and sentence.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
8/21
In such circumstance, the sentence, if any, passed by the Court
shall be deemed to have no effect.
13. Referring to Section 15 of the J.J. Act, learned
counsel submits that in case of a heinous offence alleged to have
been committed by a child who has completed or is above the
age of 16 years, the Board has to conduct a preliminary
assessment with regard to his mental and physical capacity to
commit such offence, ability to understand the consequences of
the offence and the circumstances in which he allegedly
committed the offence. After this exercise, J.J. Board may pass
an order in accordance with provisions of sub-section (3) of
Section 18. Proviso to Section 15 states that while taking such
an assessment, the Board may take assistance of experienced
psychologists or psycho-social workers or other experts.
14. In the case of Barun Chandra Thakur Vs.
Master Bholu & Anr. reported in (2023) 12 SCC 401, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court has pleased to hold and declare that the
Board is obliged to take the assistance of experienced
psychologists while considering a case under Section 15 of the
J.J. Act. It is submitted that once the records of the case are
transferred under sub-section (3) of Section 18 of J.J. Act to the
Children’s Court for trial of the accused as an adult, the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
9/21
Children’s Court would be guided by Section 19 of the J.J. Act.
15. In the case of Lalu Kumar and Ors. vs. The
State of Bihar reported in 2019 (4) PLJR 833, the learned Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court has held that Section 19(1)
operates as a double safety valve and protects the right of a child
who is sought to be prosecuted as an adult. It is because the
Children’s Court may still take a view that there is no need for
trial of a child as an adult and may conduct an inquiry of the
Board and pass appropriate order in accordance with law under
Section 18 of the J.J. Act.
16. It is submitted that in this case, the learned Special
Judge was required to remit the records and send the accused to
the Juvenile Justice Board where preliminary assessment in
terms of Section 15 of the J.J. Act would have been done.
Section 15 assessment is in the exclusive domain of the Juvenile
Justice Board but the said exercise has been undertaken by the
learned Special Judge on his own that too in haste without
seeking any assistance of a psychologist and in one stroke of
pen. The learned Special Judge has passed an order that the
accused should be tried as an adult. Thus, a mandatory exercise
required to be undertaken by the J.J. Board has been given a go-
by and an order directing the accused to face trial as an adult
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
10/21
was passed in haste, depriving him of his valuable right to get
assessment done through the Board with the assistance of
psychologists/social workers.
17. Learned counsel has though tried to take this
Court through the evidences available on the record, but in the
kind of submissions made, at the outset, which we have
recorded herein-above, in our considered opinion, we should
first consider the issue with regard to the procedures adopted by
the learned Special Judge as any discussion on the merit of the
evidence, in case the appellant succeeds on the very first
ground, would cause prejudice to his case.
Submissions on behalf of the State and Informant.
18. Mr. Bipin Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State is present. Learned Additional Public
Prosecutor having gone through the scheme of the statute of the
J.J. Act does not contest the submissions that under the scheme
of the statute, even as power has been conferred upon a Court to
determine the age, the preliminary assessment in terms of
Section 15 is only in the domain of the J.J. Board.
19. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the
informant, having understood the issues canvassed by the
learned counsel for the appellant does not contest the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
11/21
submissions as above.
Consideration
20. Having regard to the submissions recorded, herein-
above, and the materials which we have gone through, at this
stage, in our considered opinion, the learned Special Judge,
POCSO Act, proceeded to conduct the trial of the accused-
appellant as an adult without following the established
procedure of law. We would first extract the relevant provisions
contained under J.J. Act. Sub-sections (12) and (13) of Section
12 are extracted herein-below;
“2(12) “child” means a person who has not
completed eighteen years of age;
2(13) “child in conflict with law” means a
child who is alleged or found to have committed
an offence and who has not completed eighteen
years of age on the date of commission of such
offence;”
21. Section 2(20) defines the Children’s Court as under;
“ Children’s Court” means a Court established
under the Commissions for Protection of Child
Rights Act, 2005 (4 of 2006) or a Special Court
under the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), wherever
existing and where such Courts have not been
designated, the Court of Sessions having
jurisdiction to try offencs under the Act;
22. Under chapter-III Section 9(2), a Court is empowered
to determine the age of the person who is a child or was a child
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
12/21
on the date of commission of the offence. Section 9(2) reads as
under;
“9(2) In case a person alleged to have
committed an offence claims before a Court other
than a Board, that the person is a child or was a
child on the date of commission of the offence, or
if the Court itself is of the opinion that the person
was a child on the date of commission of the
offence, the said Court shall make an inquiry,
take such evidence as may be necessary (but not
an affidavit) to determine the age of such person,
and shall record a finding on the matter, stating
the age of the person as nearly as may be:
Provided that such a claim may be raised
before any Court and it shall be recognised at any
stage, even after final disposal of the case, and
such a claim shall be determined in accordance
with the provisions contained in this Act and the
rules made thereunder even if the person has
ceased to be a child on or before the date of
commencement of this Act.”
23. Immediately after sub-section (2) of Section 9, sub-
section (3) states that if the Court finds that a person has
committed an offence and was a ‘child’ on the date of
commission of such offence, it shall forward the ‘child’ to the
Board for passing an appropriate orders. Once the records are
transferred and the child is sent to the Board for passing an
appropriate order, the Board is empowered to make an inquiry
in relation to such child under Sections 17 and 18 of the J.J. Act.
However, sub-section (3) of Section 14 states that a preliminary
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
13/21
assessment in case of heinous offence under Section 15 shall be
disposed of by the Board within a period of three months from
the date of first production of the child before the Board. This
would bring us to Section 15 of the Act, which we reproduce
hereunder for a ready reference:
“15. Preliminary assessment into heinous
offences by Board.-(1) In case of a heinous
offence alleged to have been committed by a
child, who has completed or is above the age of
sixteen years, the Board shall conduct a
preliminary assessment with regard to his mental
and physical capacity to commit such offence,
ability to understand the consequences of the
offence and the circumstances in which he
allegedly committed the offence, and may pass
an order in accordance with the provisions of
sub-section (3) of Section 18:
Provided that for such an assessment, the
Board may take the assistance of experienced
psychologists or psycho-social workers or other
experts.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this
section, it is clarified that preliminary
assessment is not a trial, but is to assess the
capacity of such child to commit and understand
the consequences of the alleged offence.
(2) Where the Board is satisfied on preliminary
assessment that the matter should be disposed of
by the Board, then the Board shall follow the
procedure, as far as may be, for trial in summons
case under the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (2 of 1974):
Provided that the order of the Board to
dispose of the matter shall be appealable under
sub-section (2) of section 101.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
14/21
Provided further that the assessment under
this section shall be completed within the period
of specified in section 14.”
24. In the case of Barun Chandra Thakur (supra), the
Hon’ble Supreme Court has opined that the Board must conduct
the preliminary assessment under Section 15 of the J.J. Act with
the assistance of experienced psychologists or psycho-social
workers or other experts. In this case, no such exercise has been
undertaken before the Board. The learned Special Judge took
upon itself to just record in one line that the accused
understands the circumstances and consequences of commission
of the offence and therefore, he could be tried as an adult. This
is where the learned Special Judge has committed a grave error
and proceeded to discard the mandatory provisions of law. The
relevant paragraph of the judgment is reproduced herein-below
for a ready reference;
“32. Under the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Model Rules, 2016
(hereinafter referred to as “the Model Rules”), it is
only Rule 10-A which refers to preliminary
assessment into heinous offences by the Board.
Sub-rule (1) mentions that the first thing to be
determined by the Board is the age of the child as
to whether he is below or above the age of 16
years which is to be done as per Section 14 of the
Act. Sub-rule (2) mentions that the Board may
take assistance of the experienced psychologists or
psycho-social workers or other experts who have
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
15/21
experience of working with children in difficult
circumstances. It also provides that the District
Child Protection Unit would have a panel of such
experts to be made available to the Board for its
assistance or otherwise the Board could access
such experts independently. Sub-rule (3) declares
that the child shall be presumed to be innocent
unless proved otherwise while making the
preliminary assessment. Sub-rule (4) provides for
the consequential order to be passed by the Board
where it holds that the trial of the child is to be
carried out as an adult for which, it is required to
assign reasons and further to provide copy of order
to the child forthwith.
25. In fact, the scheme of the J.J. Act would further show
that even after the Board forms an opinion that a child, who has
completed and is just above 16 years and has committed heinous
crime is required to be tried as an adult, the final say is that of
the Children's Court. Section 19 lays down the powers of
Children’s Court. We reproduce Section 19 of the J.J. Act,
herein-below;
“19. Powers of Children’s Court.- (1) After
the receipt of preliminary assessment from the
Board under section 15, the Children ́s Court
may decide that-
(i) there is a need for trial of the child as an
adult as per the provisions of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) and pass
appropriate orders after trial subject to the
provisions of this section and section 21,
considering the special needs of the child, the
tenets of fair trial and maintaining a child
friendly atmosphere;
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
16/21
(ii) there is no need for trial of the child as an
adult and may conduct an inquiry as a Board
and pass appropriate orders in accordance with
the provisions of section 18.
(2) The Children’s Court shall ensure that the
final order, with regard to a child in conflict
with law, shall include an individual care plan
for the rehabilitation of child, including follow
up by the probation officer or the District Child
Protection Unit or a social worker.
(3) The Children’s Court shall ensure that the
child who is found to be in conflict with law is
sent to a place of safety till he attains the age of
twenty-one years and thereafter, the person
shall be transferred to a jail:
Provided that the reformative services
including educational services, skill
development, alternative therapy such as
counselling, behaviour modification therapy,
and psychiatric support shall be provided to the
child during the period of his stay in the place
of safety.
(4) The Children’s Court shall ensure that there
is a periodic follow up report every year by the
probation officer or the District Child
Protection Unit or a social worker, as required,
to evaluate the progress of the child in the place
of safety and to ensure that there is no ill-
treatment to the child in any form.
(5) The reports under sub-section (4) shall be
forwarded to the Children’s Court for record
and follow up, as may be required.”
26. Section 21 Says that no child in conflict with law shall
be sentenced to death or for life imprisonment without the
possibility of release, for any such offence, either under the
provisions of this Act or under the provisions of the Indian
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
17/21
Penal Code or any other law for the time being in force.
27. In the case of Lalu Kumar (supra), the Hon’ble
Division Bench has considered the scheme of Sections 15 and
18 of the J.J. Act. We would do no better than to reproduce those
paragraphs here-under;
“97. Section 15 of the Act of 2015, which
enumerates special provisions to tackle the child
offenders committing ‘heinous offences’ in the age
group of 16 to 18years is equally important for us.
If a child in the age group of 16 to 18 years is
alleged to have committed ‘heinous offence’, as
defined in Section 2(33) of the Act, the Board is
required to conduct a preliminary assessment.
98. In order to determine, in case of a child in the
age group of 16 to 18 years alleged to have
committed a ‘heinous offence’, whether he should
be transferred to the Children’s Court to be tried as
an adult, the Board has to follow certain essential
steps.
99.Firstly, it must conclusively determines that the
child in conflict with law before it is above the age
of 16years, but below the age of 18 years on the
date of commission of the offence. The
determination of age is very crucial for the child as
the same has the potential to expose him to the
possibility of being transferred to the Children’s
Court to be tried as an adult.
100. Secondly, if the Board comes to the
conclusion that the child before it was 16 years or
above,but below the age 18 years on the date of
commission of the offence, it would be required to
conclusively determine whether the offence alleged
to have been committed by him is a ‘heinous
offence’ or not.
101. Thirdly, transfer of a child for trial as an adult
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
18/21
can only be done after preliminary assessment by
the Board. The word ‘shall’ in Section 15(1)
indicates that it is mandatory for the Board to
conduct ‘preliminary assessment’. The ‘preliminary
assessment’ has to be conducted to assess :-
(1) Child’s mental and physical capacity to
commit alleged offence;
(2) Child’s ability to understand
consequences of the offence; and
(3)the circumstances in which the child
allegedly committed the offence.
102. Fourthly, after the preliminary assessment, the
Board is required to further determine whether it
would deal with the case of the child itself or
transfer him to the Children’s Court.
103. The aforesaid mandatory requirements areto
be carefully conducted while determining whether a
child should be transferred to the Children’s Court
to be tried as an adult or not. The legislature has
provided that for the purpose of preliminary
assessment the Board may take assistance of an
experienced psychologist or psycho-social worker
or other experts.
104. It needs to be kept in mind at this juncture that
Section 14(3) of the Act of 2015 obligates that
preliminary assessment in case of ‘heinous
offences’ under Section 15 should be completed
within three months by the Board from the date of
first production of the child before the Board.
105. If the Board is satisfied on preliminary
assessment that the matter should be disposed of by
the Board then the Board shall follow the
procedures, as far as may be, for trial in summons
case under the CrPC. In case, the Board after
preliminary assessment under Section 15 of the Act
passes an order that there is need for trial of such
child as an adult, it may order for transfer of the
case to the Children’s Court having jurisdiction to
try such offence.
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
19/21
115. Further Section 18(3) of the Act of
2015provides that where the Board, after
preliminary assessment under Section 15 of the Act
of 2015, comes to the conclusion that there is need
for trial of the child as an adult,it may order,
transfer of the trial of the case to the Children’s
Court having jurisdiction to try such offences.
116. The sixth question framed by us is in two
parts. The first part is “What is the scope of
Section19(1)(i) of the Act of 2015 in connection
with the trial of a child as an adult ?” and the
second part is “Whether the provisions of Section
19 of the Act are mandatory or the Children’s
Court has to compulsorily follow the
recommendations of the Board made under
Section 15 read with Section 18(3) of the Act of
2015?”
117. The answer to the above question will also be
in two parts.
118. Upon a case of a child having been transferred
to the Children’s Court, a duty has been cast upon
the Children’s Court to further decide about the
suitability of the child to be tried as an adult.
119. The words used in Section 19(1)(i) and19(1)
(ii) give two options to the Children’s Court. First,
to try the transferred child as an adult and second
not to deal with child as an adult.
120. The Children’s Court is required to record its
reason while arriving at a conclusion whether the
child should be treated as a child or as an adult, in
view of Rule13 (6) of the Rules.
121.In case, the Children’s Court decides to deal
with child as a child, it has to conduct an inquiry
as a Board following the procedures for trial of
summons case in accordance with the provisions
of Section 18 as would appear from the words
used in Section 19(1)(i) of the Act of 2015.
122. In case, it decides to try the child as an adult,
it shall follow the procedures, as prescribed by the
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
20/21
CrPC for the purpose of trial by Sessions Court and
pass appropriate orders after trial without prejudice
to the provisions of Sections 19 and 21 of the Act
considering special ‘needs of the child’ the tenets of
‘fair trial’ and maintaining a ‘child friendly’
atmosphere as provided under Section 19(1)(i) of
the Act of 2015.”
28. In our considered opinion, the impugned judgment
and order suffers from serious infirmity as the mandatory
procedures contained in Sections 15 and 19 of the J.J. Act have
not been followed by the learned Special Judge. We, therefore,
set aside the impugned judgment and order and remit the matter
to the J.J. Board, Bettiah, West Champaran to start with the
exercise under Section 15 of the J.J. Act and pass an appropriate
order, in accordance with law, at the earliest, preferably, within a
period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment or in any case no longer the statutory period of three
months.
29. The J.J. Board shall take assistance of the
psychologist, psycho-social workers or any other experts in the
assessment and would pass such order as the Board deems just
and proper.
Further course of action will be consequential to the order
passed by the learned J.J. Board.
30. Let the trial court records together with a copy of this
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.720 of 2023 dt.11-02-2026
21/21
judgment be sent down to the learned trial court from where the
records shall be transmitted to the J.J. Board, Bettiah, West
Champaran within a week from the date of receipt of the
records.
31. The learned Principal District & Sessions Judge,
Bettiah, West Champarana shall ensure that the records are sent
to the J.J. Board within the given period through a special
messenger.
32. This appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein-
above.
33. If occasions so arise, the fresh trial may be conducted
and it will be open to the appellant to make application for bail
before the competent court.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
( Praveen Kumar, J)
brajesh/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date 13.02.2026
Transmission Date 13.02.2026
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.