NDLI: Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2015 – ss. 9 94
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) Juvenile Justice (care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (2 of 2016)
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 Referred Case 13 Referred Case 14 Referred Case 15 Referred Case 16
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Application Allowed
Headnote	Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – ss. 9, 94 – Juvenility – Determination of – The applicant, along with two other accomplices had committed murder of five women, and two children – They were tried for commission of offences u/ss. 302, 342, 397, 449 r/w 120B and 34 of IPC – Trial Court sentenced the appellant to death – Both the judgment of conviction and order of sentence were confirmed by the High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal preferred by appellant against the said judgment – The review petition filed by appellant was also dismissed – The appellant (in detention for more than 28 years) filed present application under s. 9(2) of the Act of 2015, requesting Supreme Court to hold that the applicant was a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence – In 2019 by order, the Supreme Court referred the matter to the Principle District and Sessions Judge(Inquiring Judge) to decide the issue of juvenility of the applicant – The Inquiring Judge gave his report sustaining the applicant’s claim for juvenility – Held: On examination of various documents, it was found that the applicant’s original name was ‘Niranaram’ and the applicant discharged his part of onus to establish that it is he who has been tried and convicted as ‘Narayan’ – Now, considering the course adopted by the Inquiring Judge, s. 9(2) of the 2015 Act does not prescribe following the trial procedure, as stipulated in the 1973 Code and Evidence Act, 1872 – The legislature has not mandated any specific procedure to be followed by the Court for conducting inquiry to determine juvenility of the claimant under the 2015 Act – Therefore, Court can formulate its own procedure for conducting inquiry on this count – No flaw in the procedure which has been adopted by the Inquiring Judge in the instant case – As far as certificate of date of birth is concerned, the applicant has relied on the certificate issued by the School for determination of his age – Said certificate was issued by the office of the headmaster of the School – The principal of the school has in writing disclosed that the content of the admission register is maintained in ordinary course of business – In normal course the said register would satisfy the test specified in S.35 of the 1872 Act, of being a relevant fact – Hence, the date of birth of the applicant as reflected in the certificate issued by the School is to be accepted for determining his age at the time of commission of the offence of which he has been convicted – Going by that certificate, his age at the time of commission of offence was 12 years and 6 months – Thus, he was a child/juvenile on the date of commission of offence – Order sentencing him to death passed by the Trial Court and subsequently confirmed by the High Court and by the Supreme Court invalidated by operation of law. Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – s. 9 (2) – Stage of raising juvenility plea – A petition u/s. 9 (2) of the 2015 Act contemplates statutory remedy, plea for which can be raised at any stage – On juvenility plea, if a writ petition is dismissed in limine, such order would not foreclose the option of an accused (or a convict) to make plea for juvenility under subsection (2) of s. 9 of the 2015 Act.Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – ss. 9(2), 103 – ‘Inquiry’ – As far as the procedure for making an inquiry by the Court, s. 9(2) does not prescribe scrupulously following trial procedure, as stipulated in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – The Court can formulate its own procedure for conducting inquiry.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 298
Petitioner	Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary
Respondent	The State Of Maharashtra
SCR	[2023] 6 S.C.R. 1055
Judgement Date	2023-03-27
Case Number	25-26

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

Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Please Log-in to view this content

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

Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Babloo Pasi Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr.

Vikram Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Vijay Singh Vs. State of Delhi

Hari Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

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

Babla @ Dinesh Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Dharambir Vs. State (nct of Delhi) and Anr.

Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

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

Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Babloo Pasi Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr.

Vikram Singh Vs. State of Haryana

Vijay Singh Vs. State of Delhi

Hari Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.

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

Babla @ Dinesh Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Dharambir Vs. State (nct of Delhi) and Anr.

Narayan Chetanram Chaudhary Vs. The State of Maharashtra