BAL SAKHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH reference to the order passed by this Court on 18.04.2007, report has been filed through the affidavit by the Legal Coordinator of the petitioner -Bal Sakha. The report would indicate that the petitioner's counsel, Faiz Ur Rahman and the Advocate General visited various Observation Homes and found out various irregularities in those Homes. They give the following factors: Amit Ambar Kachhap Versus Union Of India (i) In the Observation Homes at Chaibasa, attached toilet facilities are lacking and the same are required to be provided; (ii) In the Observation Homes at Ranchi, water supply is inadequate especially in summer season during which period the tap water supply is erratic and irregular. Deep boring and a motor pump are required for the said Observation Home; (iii) With respect to the medical report on the assessment of age it takes a very long time and, therefore, suitable direction by this Court may be given to the Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer for submission of the medical report in time without delay.

(2.) WE have heard Advocate General.

(3.) SO this observation/direction of the Supreme Court which has been given to all the State Governments would apply to the present case also. Therefore, all the Juvenile Justice Boards situated at 7 districts are directed to verify how many accused are either on bail or in jail or facing trial for about six months without commencement of the trial where they are charged for the offences punishable upto 7 years. After these particulars are collected, the Juvenile Justice Board is to drop the matter as directed by the Supreme Court in the judgment cited above(Supra). The Juvenile Justice Boards shall take into consideration the fact that the age of the juvenile has been enhanced from 16 years to 18 years. So the principle laid down by the Supreme Court could be applied in respect of the juvenile offenders who are aged upto 18 years.