SUBHASH Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionists and learned AGA for the State.

(2.) This is a revision against the order dated 9.5.2006 passed by Mr. S. Lal, Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Bulandshahar in ST. No. 45 of 1995 (State v. Natthi and others) whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge refused to hold the revisionists Subhash, Nanda @ Nan Kishore, Harpal and Harkesh as juveniles.

(3.) It appears that the occurrence of this case took place on 18.6.1994 and on that date the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 was in force, in which a male person upto the age of 16 years was considered as a juvenile. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar appears to have refused to declare the revisionists as juveniles on the ground that they had already completed 18 years before the commencement of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and based this finding on the verdict of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand and others, AIR 2005 SC 2731. The aforesaid Act of 2000 has been materially amended in the year 2006 by the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) (Amendment) Act 2006 and thereby an explanation was added in Section 20 of the Act of 2000 which is extracted as follows: