SAALIM Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KHEM Karan, J. Heard Sri A. K. Pandey, the learned Counsel for the revisionist and the learned Counsel for the Union of India.

(2.) THIS revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Section 53 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2000), is directed against order dated 25-9-2001, of Special Judge, Barabanki (Under N. D. P. S. Act, 1985) by which he turned down the plea of the revisionist that he was a "juvenile" within the meaning of the Act of 2000.

(3.) THE provisions contained in the Act of 2000, are in the shape of beneficial legislation and ought to be kept in mind, while examining, the question as to whether a particular person is entitled to the protection thereof. It would be useful to recall the recent observations of the apex Court, made in Rajinder Chandra v. State of Chhattishgarh and another, (2002)2 SCC 287.