VIJAY SINGH versus STATE OF DELHI

Citation: [2012] 7 S.C.R. 434 · Decided: 29-08-2012 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2012] 7 S.C.R. 434 
VIJAY SINGH 
v. 
STATE OF DELHI 
(Criminal Appeal No.1322 of 2012) 
AUGUST 29, 2012 
,. 
[T.S. THAKUR AND FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM 
KALIFULLA, JJ.] 
Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 
C [as amended] - ss. 2(k), 2(1), 7A, 20 and 49 - Juvenile Justice 
(Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 - rr.12 and 98 
- Appellant allegedly gave knife blows on the person of PW-
4 - Trial court convicted appellant u/s.307 /PC and sentenced 
him to rigorous imprisonment for five years - Conviction and 
o sentence confirmed by High Court - Before Supreme Court, 
for the first time the appellant took the plea of juvenility -
Placing reliance upon his school leaving certificate, the 
appellant pleaded that that he was a juvenile on the date of 
the occurrence - Held: On facts, order of conviction imposed 
E on the appellant not liable to be interfered with - However, as 
per the school leaving certificate, the date of birth of appellant 
recorded in the school admission register was 1-12-1981 -
Principal/Head Master of the School verified the admission 
register - Report submitted by the District Judge also 
F 
disclosed that the certificate was genuine, and that the date 
of birth recorded therein was correct - Thus, on the date of 
offence i.e. 11-3-1998, the appellant was 16 years 3 months 
and 10 days old - Since appellant was below 18 years of age 
on the date of commission of the offence, the provisions of 
G the Juvenile Justice Act would apply in full force in his case -
However, since the offence was alleged to have been 
committed more than 10 years ago and the appellant would 
have now crossed the age of 30 years, no point in remitting 
the matter back to the Juvenile Justice Court and instead, 
H 
434 
VIJAY SINGH v. STATE OF DELHI 
435 
appropriate orders can be passed by the Supreme Court itself A 
- Consequently, conviction of appellant sustained, but the 
sentence imposed on him set aside - Penal Code, 1860 -
s.307 . 
. The offence alleged against the appellant was that on 
8 
11-3-1998, he gave knife blows on the person of PW-4 
who demanded repayment of the money (Rs.3,0001-) lent 
to the appellant. The trial court convicted the appellant 
under Section 307 IPC and sentenced him to rigorous 
imprisonment for five years. The conviction and sentence 
C 
was confirmed by the High Court. 
In the instant appeal before this Court, for the first 
time the appellant took the plea of juvenility. Placing 
reliance upon the date of birth recorded in his School 
Leaving Certificate (wherein the date of birth of the 0 
appellant was recorded as 1-12-1981 ), the appellant 
contended that he was less than 18 years of age on the 
date of the incident i.e. 11-3-1998. This Court directed an 
enquiry by the District Judge as to whether the appellant 
was a juvenile on 11-3-1998 and to submit a detailed 
E 
report. The District Judge returned a finding that on the 
date of the incident, namely, 11-3-1998, the age of the 
appellant was less than 18 years of age, and therefore he 
was a juvenile on that date. 
F 
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. Having regard to the overwhelming 
evidence led before the trial Court and on being 
convinced of the proof of guilt against the appellant, the 
G 
appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 
307, IPC alongwith a sentence of five years' rigorous 
imprisonment. The High Court, on a detailed analysis of 
the evidence available on record and the injuries 
sustained by the vicitim-PW-4, which was supported by 
H 
436 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2012] 7 S.C.R. 
A medical evidence, dismissed the appeal. In the 
circumstances, this Court does not find any scope to 
interfere with the order of conviction imposed on the 
appellant. [Para 7) [442-C-D] 
8 
2. The plea of juvenility taken by the appellant is to 
be considered in the light of the provisions of the 
Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 (the Act) as repealed by the 
Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000, 
as well as, the subsequent amendment of 2006 read 
c along with the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of 
Children) Rules, 2007.The relevant provision which is 
required to be noted is Section 7A of the Act in the 
present form which came to be inserted by the 
amendment Act of 33/2006 w.e.f. 22.08.2006. The other 
0 provisions are Section 2 (I) the definition of 'juvenile in 
conflict with law', Section 20 of the Act and Rule 12 of the 
Juvenile Justic

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