JAKHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the matter of determination of the age of the petitioner, the Court of Session should have followed the procedure as given in the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, hereinafter referred to as an Act. On merits, he submits that the X-ray report mentions the age of the delinquent between 16 to 17 years. He accordingly submits that the benefit of two years on either side has to be given to the delinquent accused. As the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is juvenile, he submits that only Juvenile Court could make an enquiry with regard to his age.

(2.) IT is not in dispute that the trial is pending before the IIIrd Additional Judge, Shivpuri.

(3.) READING of the above provision makes it apparent that when a person is brought before Magistrate, then he is supposed to refer the matter to the Juvenile Court. The above section visualises an eventuality where an accused person is brought before a Magistrate. It is only in this eventuality the procedure indicated in the Act, is to be followed. If a person is brought before the Court of Session then the above procedure is not required to be gone into. This however does not absolve the Court of Session from determining the age of delinquent accused. He is to follow the procedure as indicated in the Act. He has to apply his mind and come to the conclusion with regard to the age of the person brought before him. In somewhat similar circumstances Hon'ble Shri Tej Shankar, J. in Matadin v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1994 JLJ 455, observed as under :-