UMED ALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Z. Kamar, learned senior counsel and Amicus Curiae and Mr. Azad Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State.

(2.) By the order dtd. 10/11/2021, it had been held that a plea was raised that when the offence was committed, the appellant was a juvenile and on being satisfied, an enquiry was made on the issue as to whether the appellant was a juvenile at the time when the offence was committed on 16/3/2018. By the order of 10/11/2021, the report of the learned District Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoli, dtd. 6/9/2021 was taken note of wherein the report of the enquiry provides that the appellant was in-fact a juvenile when the offence was committed. Accordingly, by the order dtd. 10/11/2021, the appellant was required to appear before the Juvenile Justice Board, Mangaldoi within a period of 10 days from the date of the order, for a consideration on the allegations that were raised against him. Accordingly, Mr. Azad Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellant makes a submission that the appellant did appeared before the Juvenile Justice Board on 18/11/2021.

(3.) A question has been raised as to what would be the status of the appellant on being found to be a juvenile as regards the conviction and sentence what was passed against him by the judgment and order dtd. 17/12/2020 in Special (POCSO) Case No.13 of 2018, by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Darrang, Mangaldai.