TINKU KUMAR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned J.C. to G.P. II

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a juvenile but he is facing trial in a case registered under Sections 376(2), 302/201 I.P.C. pending in the Court of A.D.J. 1st Dhanbad in connection with Nirsa P.S. Case No. 017 of 2003 corresponding to G.R. No. 366 of 2003 (ST. No. 319 of 2003).

(3.) Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner filed an application before the learned trial Court taking the plea that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner had not attained the age of 18 years, so he is a Juvenile under the definition of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, in support of which he had filed School Leaving Certificate, but the learned trial Court did not pass any order and went on recording evidence of witnesses. It is further submitted that such a plea of being a juvenile can be taken at any stage upto highest Court and there are several such rulings and he cited a number of rulings before me including the Full Bench decision of this very Court in which a majority view has been taken that whenever such a plea is raised, then inquiry in respect of petitioner being a juvenile has to be made, if not decided earlier. Here in the instant case on behalf of the petitioner a plea has been taken that he is a juvenile, but the learned Court below has not considered this aspect of the matter and trial is proceeding.