JITENDRA RAM @JITU versus STTE OF JHARKHAND

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 286 · Decided: 25-04-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
JITENDRA RAM (IV, JITU 
v. 
ST A TE OF JHARKHAND 
APRIL 25, 2006 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN. JJ.] 
Bihar Children Act, 198:!: 
s.32(/J--lnquiry as to age of accused to ascertain whether he is a 
C child-Accused convicted u!ss. 302 and 201 lPC-Conviction affirmed by 
High Court-Plea raised before Supreme Court that at the time of commission 
of offence accused was a minor-Held, as no such plea was raised before trial 
court, it did not go into the question of age of the accused- .Jn the absence 
of any material on record. Supreme Court cannot determine age of the 
D accused on the date of commission of offence- Matter remitted to trial court 
to determine age of accused on the date of commission of offence· -If he is 
found 10 be child and/or a juvenile, trial court will deal with him accordingly-
Otherwise, the conviclion will stand-Indian Penal Code, 1860-ss. 302 and 
201--Juvenile Justice Act, 1986--s.2 (h.) 
E 
Appellant was convicted of the offences punishable under ss. 302 and 
201 IPC. The conviction and sentence of imprisonment for life was affirmed 
by the High Court. 
In the present appeal, the sole contention raised on behalf of the accused 
was that at the time of commission of the offence, he was a minor within the 
F meaning of the Bihar Children.Act, 1982 and a juvenile within the meaning 
of s.2(h) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 and was, therefore, entitled to the 
protection accordingly. No submission on merits of the matter was made. 
G 
H 
Allowing the appeal and remitting the matter to the trial court, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. Before the trial court, the appellant did not r11ise any plea 
that he was a juvenile. It is true that such a plea was raised while moving an 
application for bail for the first time; but from a perusal of the order passed 
by the High Court it would appear that the ground that the appellant was a 
child itself was not the only one on which the order granting bail to the 
286 
•· 
.._ 
JITENDRA RAM @ JITU v. ST A TE OF JHARKHAND 
287 
appellant was passed. In the absence of any plea having been taken by the A 
appellani., it ls not disputed, that the court at no stage had gone into the question 
as regards the age of the appellant. 1290-A-B; E] 
1.2. Though s.32 of the Bihar Children Act, 1982 has imposed a duty 
upon the competent authority to make an enquiry as to the age of that person 
who appears to be a child, no such enquiry was made presumably because no B 
such plea was raised. At that time, it also might not have occurred to the court 
that the accused was a child. However, the provisions of a beneficial legislation 
should ordinarily be given effect to. But, in the absence of any material on 
record, this Court cannot arrive at a definite conclusion that the appellant as 
on the date of commission of the offence was a child within the meaning of C 
the Bihar Act.1291-A; C-DI 
Bhola Bhagat v. State of Bihar, 1199718 SCC 720, relied on. 
Zakarius Lakra and Ors. v. Union of Jndia and Anr., 12005) 3 SCC 161; 
Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra, 12002) 4 SCC 388; Ramdeo Chauhan D 
alias Raj Naih v. State of Assam, 1200115 SCC 714; Krishna Bhagwan v. The 
State of Bihar, (1989) PLJR 507; Gopinath Ghosh v. State of West Bengal, 
11984) Supp. SCC 228 and Raj Singh'" State of Haryana, 12000) 6 SCC 759, 
referred to. 
1.3. Determination of the age of the appellant as on the date of the E 
commission of the offence should be done afresh by the Sessions Judge; and 
in the event, he is found to be a child and/or juvenile within the meaning of 
the Act and the Juvenile Justice Act the trial court would deal with him 
accordingly. Otherwise the present conviction will stand, as no infirmity is 
found in the judgments of the trial court and the High Court. 
(291-C; 294-C-DJ 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 489 of 
2006. 
F 
From the Final Judgment and Order dated 20.6.2003 of the High Court 
of Jharkhand in Cr. A.No. 5512003. 
G 
Shekhar Prit Jha, A.C. for the Appellant. 
Bharati Tyagi and Vishwaj it Singh for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
H 
288 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2006] SUPP. I S.C.R. 
A 
S.B. SINHA, J, Leave granted. 
The appellant herein was convicted for commission of an offence 
punishable under Sections 302 and 20 I of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 
IPC') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. 
B 
The case of the prosecution is as under : 
A First Information Report was lodged by the

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.