ARNIT DAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In an inquiry conducted under Section 32 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1986 Act') The Trial Court recorded a finding to the effect that petitioner Amit Das was not a juvenile on the date of occurrence. This finding was upheld by the learned Sessions Judge in an appeal filed by petitioner-Amit Das. The High Court also dismissed revision petition filed by the petitioner against that finding. Order of the High Court was put in issue by the petition in SLP (Crl.) 729/2000. In an appeal (Criminal Appeal No. 469/ 2000) arising out of that special leave petition (since reported as Amit Das v. State of Bihar, (2000) 5 SCC 488], dealing with that issue, it was observed :

(2.) Thus, this Court also affirmed the concurrent findings regarding the age of the petitioner and that on the date of the offence, the petitioner was not a juvenile within the meaning of the provisions of the 1986 Act.

(3.) After the judgment in Crl. Appeal No. 469/2000 was delivered by this Court on 9th May, 2000, the petitioner filed a review petition seeking review of that judgment. In the memorandum of review petition, the only issue raised is to the effect that the two Judge Bench deciding Amit Das v. State of Bihar, (supra), while holding that crucial date to determine whether an accused is a juvenile or not under the 1986 Act is the date on which the accused first appears in the Court in inquiry proceedings, has overlooked the earlier view of a three Judge Bench in the case of Umesh Chandra v, State of Rajasthan, (1982) 2 SCC 202, wherein it had been held that crucial date in such cases is the date on which offence was committed and not when the accused first appears before the Court in inquiry proceedings. The correctness of the finding that Petitioner was not a juvenile (under the 1986 Act) on the basis of the offence, has not been put in issue in the memorandum of the review petition.