LAWS(SIK)-2017-6-13

STATE OF SIKKIM Vs. PREM KUMAR RAI

Decided On June 27, 2017
STATE OF SIKKIM Appellant
V/S
Prem Kumar Rai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 ("JJ Act" for short), filed by the State, challenges the legality and propriety of a segment of Paragraph 16 of the impugned Judgment and Order, passed by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, West Sikkim at Gyalshing, in JJB Case No. 5 of 2014, State of Sikkim vs. Prem Kumar Rai, on 28.07.2015.

(2.) The impugned portion of the Paragraph is extracted herein below;

(3.) It is urged before this Court by the learned Public Prosecutor that although the averments in the Revision Petition was not confined only to the above segment, however, now the Revisionist does not press the other grounds. That, the aforesaid Order has been passed by the Juvenile Justice Board (for short "JJB"), sans an F.I.R. by the Victim before any Police Station, nor is there a complaint in existence before the State Human Rights Commission. The Juvenile Justice Board unilaterally reached a decision that the Police Personnel who had dealt with the Juvenile were guilty of having committed custodial torture, thereby ordering the Superintendent of Police, West District, to take necessary action, without issuing a Notice to the Police Personnel involved and without affording them an opportunity of placing their defence. The directions have been issued when in fact the Victim who was on trial for offences under Sections 186, 189, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1908 read with Section 169(b) of the Sikkim Police Act, 2008, and undisputedly the Police Personnel were not in the dock. Thus, the conclusion was arbitrarily arrived at with no inquiry being made into the alleged custodial torture by the Police. Reliance has been placed on Amit Kapoor vs. Ramesh Chander and Another, 2012 9 SCC 460, which has discussed the ambit of the Courts? powers under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C." for short). That, in view of the Order being arbitrary with no legal basis, the segment of Paragraph 16 be set aside.