SrinagarThe increase in age of juvenility from 16 to 18 years has retrospective and not prospective effect only, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has ruled even as it ordered an inquiry into claim of being juvenile by a person convicted of unnatural act in Budgam district last year.
In 2013, the state government increased age of juvenility from 16 to 18 years and the question to be determined before a bench of Justice M K Hanjura was whether it had retrospective effect or not.
The court replied in affirmative, underling the increase in age has its application to all cases at all material times.
Raising of the age of the juvenile from 16 to 18 years has a retrospective effect and the plea of juvenility can be raised at any time, even after the pronouncement of the judgment irrespective of the fact, whether any such plea has, or has not, been raised earlier. It is only the date of the commission of offence which is material and not the date on which cognizance has been taken or the charge has been framed or the conviction has been recorded, it said.
The court was hearing a petition by one Ishfaq Ashraf Najar who was convicted and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment and fined Rs 30,000 in a case FIR (No. 105/2009) of Police Station, Chadoora for an offence under Section 377 RPC (unnatural act) by Chief Judicial Magistrate Budgam on 28 April last year.
Najar had filed an application before the CJM Budgam, seeking protection under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2013, by producing birth certificate issued in his favour by the Jammu and Kashmir State Board of School Education, which depicted that he was born on 5 November, 1991.
He had claimed that on 10 June 2009, i.e., the date the occurrence, he was 17 years, 7 months and 5 days old and, as such, he was a juvenile and is, therefore, entitled to take umbrage under the provisions of the Act.
The trial court has got swayed by the argument that the Act is prospective and not retrospective in application, which is bad in law and has resulted in the miscarriage of justice, the court said, adding,
It is only the date of the commission of offence which is material and not the date on which cognizance has been taken or the charge has been framed or the conviction has been recorded. It was, therefore, incumbent on the part of the Trial court to look into the issue of the juvenility of the petitioner raised before him by the petitioner. The Trial Court has got swayed by the argument that the Act is prospective and not retrospective in application, which is bad in law and has resulted in the miscarriage of justice, the court said, and ordered its Registrar Judicial to coduct an inquiry into the juvenility claim by Najar.
The registrar judicial shall record the finding, in this regard, on the basis of the material that has been and may be produced by the petitioner in support of his claim that he had not completed 18 years of age on 10th June, 2009, i.e. the date of the alleged occurrence. Registrar (Judicial) shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the (State) to rebut the contentions of the petitioner, the court said and asked the Registrar Judicial to make all endeavor to see that the enquiry was brought to its logical conclusion within a fortnight.
Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now
Be Part of Quality Journalism |
Quality journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce and despite all the hardships we still do it. Our reporters and editors are working overtime in Kashmir and beyond to cover what you care about, break big stories, and expose injustices that can change lives. Today more people are reading Kashmir Observer than ever, but only a handful are paying while advertising revenues are falling fast. |
| ACT NOW |
| MONTHLY | Rs 100 |  |
| YEARLY | Rs 1000 | |
| LIFETIME | Rs 10000 | |
