Supreme Court of India Judgements

46400 Judgements hosted as on 14/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302, 363,342 and 201 – Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – Sections 2(13) and 6 –The Court analyzed relevant provisions of the JJ Act, emphasizing the mandatory nature of preliminary assessments for CICLs accused of heinous offences – The Court quashed the impugned judgment and ordered the appellant’s release, noting that the proceedings against him were vitiated due to the violation of the JJ Act.

Mar 26, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THIRUMOORTHY — Appellant Vs. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Criminal…

Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – Section 94 – Juvenile – Determination of Age – In the order of priorities, the date of birth certificate from the school stands at the highest pedestal whereas ossification test has been kept at the last rung to be considered, only in the absence of the criteria Nos. 1 and 2, i.e. in absence of both certificate from school and birth certificate issued by a Corporation/Municipal Authority/Panchayat.

Mar 9, 2024 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINOD KATARA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Criminal) No(s).…

Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 – Section 16 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – Section 25 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 – Rule 12 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 307 read with Section 34 – Murder – – the conviction of the appellant under Sections 302 and 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, but all the sentences which have been awarded to him are hereby quashed as such sentences cannot be given to a juvenile, in view of Section 16 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 – The appeal is partially allowed concerning the issue of juvenility – The High Court’s order is modified accordingly.

Nov 25, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PAWAN KUMAR — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ. )…

Acquittal Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – Section 9 (2) – a casual or cavalier approach should not be taken in determining the age of the accused or convict on his plea of juvenility, but a decision against determination of juvenility ought not to be taken solely for the reason that offence involved is heinous or grave HELD 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 for which he has been convicted

Mar 28, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH NARAYAN CHETANRAM CHAUDHARY @APPLELLANT Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph, Aniruddha Bose and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. ) Criminal…

Juvenile Justice

Kathua Gang Rape and Murder Case – – Respondent accused was not a juvenile at the time of commission of the offence and should be tried the way other co-accused were tried – Impugned order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate and the High Court which held that one of the accused was a juvenile is set aside – Appeal allowed.

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR (NOW U.T. OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR) AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SHUBAM SANGRA — Respondent ( Before :…

Juvenile Justice

HELD It is evident from the report of the medical board that the first respondent was not a juvenile. The entire record which was sought to be relied upon by the first respondent in support of the plea of juvenility was fabricated. The High Court has erred in accepting the plea of juvenility.

Sep 20, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH XYZ — Appellant Vs. ABHISHEIK AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and Hima Kohli, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal Nos…

Juvenile Justice

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 136 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 – Section 7A – Plea of juvenility could be raised in any court, at any stage even after the final disposal of the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution. If two views possible on evidence then view holding accused to be juvenile be favoured in borderline cases.

Sep 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH VINOD KATARA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Criminal)…

Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) Act, 2000 – Subsection (2) of Section 7A provided that if after holding an inquiry, the Court found the accused to be juvenile on the date of commission of the offence, the Court was under a mandate to forward the juvenile to the Juvenile Justice Board for passing appropriate orders. Subsection (2) of Section 7A further provided that in such a case, the sentence passed by Criminal Court shall be deemed to have no effect in such a case. Accused shall be forthwith set at liberty

Apr 17, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANJAY PATEL AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Abhay S. Oka, JJ.…

You missed

Arbitration Constitution

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Curative petition – The Court found that the arbitral tribunal’s decision was not perverse or irrational and that the CMRS certificate did not conclusively prove that defects were cured within the cure period – The Court emphasized the tribunal’s domain to interpret the contract and the limited scope of judicial interference in arbitral awards – The Supreme Court concluded that the curative petition was maintainable and that there was no miscarriage of justice in restoring the arbitral award.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302, read with 34 – Murder – The Supreme Court found that the High Court did not properly address whether the Trial Court’s acquittal was a plausible conclusion from the evidence – The Supreme Court emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution and that the accused do not have to prove their innocence unless there is a statutory reverse onus – The Supreme Court concluded that the evidence did not warrant overturning the acquittal, as the Trial Court’s view was possible and not perverse.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder – Dispute over a blocked pathway – The Court found no evidence of provocation by the deceased that would justify the appellants’ brutal attack, nor any exercise of the right to private defence – The Court applied principles from previous judgments to determine the lack of private defence and the presence of intention to cause harm – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellants’ actions were not in self-defence and that their intention was to inflict harm, affirming the lower courts’ decisions.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Insurance Act, 1938 – Section 45 – Policy not to be called in question on ground of mis-statement after two years – The Court found no suppression of material facts and criticized the NCDRC for not requiring proper evidence from the respondent – The judgment discusses the principles of ‘uberrimae fidei’ (utmost good faith) and the burden of proof in insurance contracts – The Court concluded that the insurance company failed to prove the alleged suppression of facts, thus the repudiation was unjustified.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw