RXXXXX Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenging the above captioned judgment of conviction and sentence, the convict, who is a CCL, has come up before this Court by filing the present criminal appeal.

(2.) We have heard counsel for the appellant and State, and instead of admitting the matter for final hearing, we have noticed one fundamental defect which must be addressed at the initial stage itself, because if not cured at this stage, it would further delay proceedings, put the convict in a queue which would be later than that of today, and serve no purpose.

(3.) The fundamental defect that is noticeable is in the sentencing portion of the impugned judgment. As per the impugned judgment, the appellant was treated as a child but was tried as an Adult as mandated in Ss.19 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (hereinafter called the 'JJ Act') in the above captioned trial. The trial Court held the present appellant guilty of the commission of offenses punishable under Ss.Ss.506 and 302, read with Ss.34 of the IPC.