MUKUL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) List revised. None appears to press the Criminal Revision. Since this is a Criminal Revision under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, this Court has got no option except to proceed to decide the Revision itself on its own merit after hearing the Government Act.

(2.) In the Revision, in question, the revisionist has questioned the judgment dated 3rd January, 2015, as rendered by the Sessions Judge, Haridwar, in Criminal Appeal No. 147 of 2014, Mukul Vs. State of Uttarakhand, whereby the Appeal preferred by the revisionist against the denial of benefit under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, which was preferred against the decision of the Juvenile Justice Board which had not determining him as to be a juvenile on the date of commission of offence, the claim was dismissed by the Board and, consequently, had affirmed the order of the Juvenile Justice Board as passed on 20th October, 2014, rejecting the claim of juvenility and consequent denial of benefit of Section 12 of the Act, 2005.

(3.) Brief fact, which emanates for consideration before this Court is that there was an F.I.R. lodged, which was registered being F.I.R. No. 71/14 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 120-B, 504, 506 and 34 of the I.P.C. at Police Station Jhabreda , District Haridwar. As per the set of allegations, which was levelled in the F.I.R. and as registered against the revisionist and other co-accused persons, the fact, which shows that the dispute arose amongst themselves when the accused persons had visited the kiosk (thela) of chowmin, which was being conducted by the complainant and the victim and they tried to exert pressure on the complainant and as a consequence thereto when there was a retaliation submitted by the son of the complainant in extending privileges to the group of persons, of which, the revisionist/ accused person, of which the revisionist was also one of the members, they had assaulted the brother of the complainant and, consequently, due to the aforesaid assault, it has resulted into his death of Sahjad S/o Jamshed.