SATISH @ DHANNA versus STATE OF M.P. & ORS.

Citation: [2009] 6 S.C.R. 486 · Decided: 17-04-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 6 S.C.R. 486 
A 
SATISH @ DHANNA 
1' 
v. 
STATE OF M.P. & ORS. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 761 of 2009) 
B 
APRIL 17, 2009 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR 
GANGULY, JJ.] 
J. 
JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF 
c CHILDREN) ACT, 2000: 
ss.2 (K), 16 and 20 - 'Juvenile' - On date of occurrence, 
1986 Act was in operation - Subsequently 2000 Act coming 
into force - Held: On the date of occurrence and on the date 
D of production of offender in court, he had not completed 18 
years of age - He cannot be denied benefit of 2000 Act -
Referring him to Juvenile Board at this stage would not be 
proper - While sustaining the conviction, sentence restricted 
to period already undergone - Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 147, 
E 148, 3021149. 
In the instant appeal filed by the appellant, who faced 
trial along with others for offences punishable u/ss. 147, 
148 and 3021149 IPC, it was contended that on the date 
of occurrence he was a juvenile. 
F 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: It is to be noted that the Juvenile Justice Act, 
1986 was in operation on the date of occurrence. 
G 
Subsequently, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection 
of Children) Act, 2000 was enacted and it came into force 
w.e.f. 1.4.2001. Under s.2(h) of the 1986 Act, a juvenile is 
one who is below the age of 16 years whereas uls 2(k) of 
the 2000 Act, a juvenile or child means a person who has 
H 
486 
SATISH @ DHANNA v. STATE OF M.P. & ORS. 
487 
not completed 18 years of age. The fact that on the date 
A 
of occurrence and the date of production before the 
court the appellant had not completed 18 years of age 
stands fully established on record. At this distant point 
of time to refer the appellant to the Juvenile Board would 
not be proper. Therefore, while sustaining the conviction 
B 
for the offence for which he has been found guilty, the 
sentence awarded is restricted to the period already 
undergone. [Para 3] [488-C-E; 489-A-B] 
Bhola Bhagat v. State of Bihar 1997 (8) SCC 720; 
Gopinath Ghosh v. State of West Bengal 1984 Supp SCC 
C 
228 and Bhoop Ram v. State of UP. 1989 (3) SCC 1, relied 
on. 
· Case Law Reference: 
1997 (8) sec 120 
relied on 
1984 Supp sec 228 
relied on 
1989 (3) sec 1 
relied on 
para 3 
para 3 
para 3 
D 
CRIMINAL APP ELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
E 
No. 761 of 2009. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 09.08.2007 of the High 
. Court of M.P. Bench at Indore in Criminal No. 152/98. 
Shashindra Tripathi, Pratibha Sharma, Sharad Tripathi and 
Debasis Misra for the Appellants. 
C.D. Singh, Sunny Chaudhary, Aditya Singh, Upasana 
Nath and Arvind Verma for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division 
F 
G 
H 
488 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009] 6 S.C.R. 
A Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench. Stand 
of the present appellant was that he was juvenile when the 
occurrence took place. His date of birth was 12.11.1980. 
Various accused persons faced trial for offence punishable 
under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of the 
B Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). Learned counsel 
for the appellant submitted that since the accused was juvenile, 
his trial could not have been held alongwith others. Learned 
counsel for the respondent-State on the other hand submitted 
!hat the question whether the appellant was a juvenile y.tas never 
C raised earlier. 
3. It is to be noted that prior to the date of occurrence the 
Madhya Pradesh Children Act, 1928 (in short the ·Children Act') 
was in force. The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (in short · 1986 Act') 
was in operation on the date of occurrence. Subsequently, the 
D Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 
(hereinafter referred to as '2000 Act') has been enacted. Under 
section 2(h) of the 1986 Act, a juvenile is one who is below the 
age of 16 years. Under the 2000 Act under Section 2(k), a 
juvenile or child means a person who has not completed 18 
E years of age. The fact that on the date in question, i.e. on the 
date of occurrence and the date of production before the Court 
the appellant had not completed 18 years of age stands fully 
established on record. Section 16 of the 2000 Act provides that 
no juvenile shall be sentenced to death or imprisonment for life 
F or committed to prison in default of payment of fine or in default 
of furnishing security. Section 20 provides for special provi

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