NDLI: The State of Jammu & Kashmir (now U.t. of Jammu & Kashmir) & Ors. Vs. Shubam Sangra

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	2014: r.74 Juvenile Justice: Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9 Referred Case 10 Referred Case 11 Referred Case 12
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Juvenile Justice: Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2014: r.74 – Plea of Juvenility – Kathua Rape Case – The Kathua rape case involved abduction, gang rape and murder of an eight year-old girl by six men and the respondent (claiming to be a juvenile) – Special Medical Board opined the age of respondent as above 19 years – However, the CJM, Kathua relied on the deposition of the Executive Officer, Municipal Committee and the deposition of father of respondent held that respondent was juvenile on date of the commission of the offence – High Court upheld the order of CJM – Hence instant appeal by State – Held: Sub rule (3) of r.74 provides that in the absence of mentioned certificates or in the event of any contradiction, the authority deciding the issue of age ‘may’ refer the matter to duly constituted medical board – The word “may” should be read as “shall” having regard to the very object of subrule (3) of r.74 – If there is a clear and unambiguous case in favour of the juvenile accused that he was minor on the date of the incident and the documentary evidence at least prima facie established the same, he would be entitled to the special protection under the Juvenile Justice Act – Whereas when an accused commits a heinous and grave crime and thereafter attempts to take the statutory shelter under the guise of being a minor, a casual or cavalier approach cannot be permitted while recording as to whether he is a juvenile or not – There is no good reason to overlook or ignore or doubt the credibility of the final opinion given by a team of five qualified doctor – In the absence of all other acceptable materials, if opinion of the experts points to a reasonable possibility regarding range of his age, the Court must consider the same in the interest of justice – In the instant case, the documents evidencing date of birth did not inspire any confidence and there was no other option but to fall back on the report of the Special Medical Board in the interest of justice – The order passed by the High Court affirming the CJM’s order was not sustainable in law – Respondent accused was not juvenile at the time of the commission of the offence and, therefore, should be tried the way other co-accused were tried – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 – ss.7A and 94 – Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2013 – ss.8 and 48. Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2013: ss.8, 48 – Plain reading of s.8 of the Act, 2013 indicates that whenever a claim of juvenility is raised before any court or the court is of the opinion that the accused person was a juvenile on the date of the commission of the offence, then it is mandatory for the court to make an inquiry and in the course of such inquiry, the court may take such evidence as may be necessary, however, not an affidavit, so as to determine the age of such person – At the end of the inquiry, if the court finds a person to be a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence under sub-section (1) of s.8, then in such circumstance, the court is obliged in law to forward the juvenile to the Juvenile Justice Board for passing appropriate order and the sentence – s.48 talks about a competent authority, whereas, s.8 is in respect to the court – However, what is relevant to note is that in both the Sections the word ‘shall’ has been used. Word and phrase: “May” – When Mandatory – It is a well settled principle of interpretation that the word ‘may’ when used in legislation by itself does not connote a directory meaning – If in a particular case, in the interests of equity and justice it appears to the court that the intent of the legislature is to convey a statutory duty, then the use of the word ‘may’ will not prevent the court from giving it a mandatory colour – Jammu and Kashmir Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2014 – r.74.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 1205
Petitioner	The State Of Jammu & Kashmir (now U.t. Of Jammu & Kashmir) & Ors.
Respondent	Shubam Sangra
SCR	[2022] 8 S.C.R. 349
Judgement Date	2022-11-16
Case Number	1928

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

The State of Jammu & Kashmir (now U.t. of Jammu & Kashmir) & Ors. Vs. Shubam Sangra

Please Log-in to view this content

Shah Nawaj Vs. State of U.p. & Anr.

Pappu Vs. Sonu and Anr.

The JAMMU AND KASHMIR JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT, 2013. (Act No. VII of 2013)

State of Jammu and Kashmir Vs. A. R. Zakki and Ors.

Vikram Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Vijay Singh Vs. State of Delhi

Manoj @ Monu @ Vishal Chaudhary Vs. State of Haryana & Anr

Hari Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Babla @ Dinesh Vs. State of Uttarakhand

The State of Jammu & Kashmir (now U.t. of Jammu & Kashmir) & Ors. Vs. Shubam Sangra

The State of Jammu & Kashmir (now U.t. of Jammu & Kashmir) & Ors. Vs. Shubam Sangra

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Shah Nawaj Vs. State of U.p. & Anr.

Pappu Vs. Sonu and Anr.

The JAMMU AND KASHMIR JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT, 2013. (Act No. VII of 2013)

State of Jammu and Kashmir Vs. A. R. Zakki and Ors.

Vikram Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Vijay Singh Vs. State of Delhi

Manoj @ Monu @ Vishal Chaudhary Vs. State of Haryana & Anr

Hari Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

Babla @ Dinesh Vs. State of Uttarakhand

The State of Jammu & Kashmir (now U.t. of Jammu & Kashmir) & Ors. Vs. Shubam Sangra