EMPEROR Vs. DAMODAR GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal from an order made by the Presidency Magistrate, Seventh Court, in which he directed a child, who was tried before him, to be sent to a certified school. There is, I think, no doubt that the order was a wise order, if the Magistrate had power to make it. But it is urged on behalf of the appellant that the ordinary Presidency Magistrates have no power to try children, who, it is said, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court.

(2.) SECTION 46 of the Bombay Children Act, 1924, provides in Sub-section (I) that the Provincial Government may provide for the establishment in any area of one or more separate Courts for the conduct of proceedings under the Act at which the attendance of a child is required. Then there is a proviso: that where a child is accused of an offence triable jointly with any other person not being a child, nothing in this Sub-section shall affect...the powers of the court, to try such other person under any other law for the time being in force.

(3.) UNDER Section 5 it is provided that the powers conferred on Courts by this Act shall be exercised only by (a) the High Court; (b) a Court of Session ; (c) a District Magistrate; (d) a Sub-divisional Magistrate; (e) a salaried Presidency Magistrate; (f) any Juvenile Court constituted under Section 46; and (g) any Magistrate of the first class. So that under that section the powers can be exercised by salaried Presidency Magistrates as well as by any Juvenile Court. The object of that section seems to be to exclude from the exercise of powers under the Act all Courts other than those specified, and not to confer jurisdiction, and I am inclined to think that, notwithstanding that section, it would be open to Government to confer jurisdiction on the Juvenile Court to the exclusion of other Courts named. But, so far as that section goes, it indicates that the jurisdiction could be exercised both by Presidency Magistrates and by the Juvenile Court.