APEEJAY SCHOOL, SAKET Vs. NAYA SAMAJ PARENTS ASSOCIATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed under Sec. 101(5) read with Sec. 103(2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (the JJ Act) by the respondent/school in Crl. Appeal No. 283/2024 on the file of the ASJ-06 (POCSO Act), South East district, Saket Court, New Delhi, aggrieved by the order dtd. 25/6/2025 by which the application for condonation of delay of 125 days in filing the appeal was allowed. The said appeal was filed against the order dtd. 5/3/2024 in Complaint bearing no.CWC/LN/2023-24/1016on the file of the Child Welfare Committee, District-South (the CWC).

(2.) Complaint bearing no. CWC/LN/2023-24/1016 was filed on 23/2/2024 by some students of the appellant/school under Sec. 29 (2) of the JJ Act. As per complaint, the school subjected fee defaulting students to discriminatory treatment during the annual examination. The students were segregated from other students, sent to the auditorium, threatened that they would not be permitted to appear for NEET exam, and denied official answer sheets and were made to use pages from notebooks as answer sheet. It was also alleged that 20 to 30 minutes was reduced from the stipulated two hour examination duration, while the first half hour was spent in lectures and intimidation. The school also confiscated the question papers and answer sheets. The students claimed severe trauma and fear regarding their academic future. The CWC vide order dtd. 5/3/2024 held that on 4/3/2024, the parents appearing before the CWC confirmed that the children were thereafter permitted to appear for their examinations and hence dismissed the complaint as no further intervention was required in the matter. Aggrieved by the said order, the students filed Criminal Appeal no. 283/2024 along with an application to condone the delay of 125 days in filing the appeal. The appellate court accepted the reasons given in the application for condonation of delay and held that the appeal had, in fact, been filed within the statutorily prescribed period of 30 days. Aggrieved, the present appeal has been preferred by the school, the respondent in the aforesaid Complaint.

(3.) In the appeal memorandum, it is inter alia contended that the appellate court erred in condoning the delay without applying the statutory test provided in the proviso to Sec. 101(1) of the JJ Act, which permits an appeal to be filed after thirty days upon satisfaction that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within time. The appellate court failed to determine the actual period of delay, which, as per the dates relied upon by the parties, is 148 days, although condonation of only 125 days was sought, leaving 23 days unexplained. Even assuming that the appellants therein acquired knowledge of the order dtd. 5/3/2024 only on 2/8/2024, they filed the appeal only on 30/8/2024, despite having their affidavits verified on 6/8/2024, and have furnished no explanation for the intervening period. It was further contended that the appellate court failed to properly evaluate the explanation given by the appellants therein in the light of the contemporaneous record, particularly the grievance status dtd. 20/6/2024 filed by one of the parents, wherein their knowledge of the disposal of the complaint was recorded, which materially contradicts the assertion that they came to know of the order only on 2/8/2024.