Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice

Plea of juvenility has to be raised in a bonafide and truthful manner. If the reliance is on a document to seek juvenility which is not reliable or dubious in nature, the appellant cannot be treated to be juvenile keeping in view that the Act is a beneficial legislation – Appellant cannot be given benefit of juvenility – HELD birth certificate issued by corporation or municipal authority or a panchayat is a relevant document to prove the juvenility -Appeal dismissed.

Feb 26, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANOJ @ MONU @ VISHAL CHAUDHARY — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian,…

Juvenile Justice

Juvenile – HELD The age recorded by the Committee or the Board to be the age of the person so brought before it shall for the purpose of the JJ Act, 2015 be deemed to be the true age of the person. The deeming provision in sub-section (3) of section 94 of the JJ Act, 2015 is also significant inasmuch as the controversy or the doubt regarding the age of the child brought before the Committee or the JJ Board is sought to be set at rest at the level of the JJ Board or the Committee itself – Appeal dismissed

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RISHIPAL SINGH SOLANKI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and B.V. Nagarathna,…

Juvenile Justice

No adoption of affected children should be permitted contrary to the provisions of the JJ Act, 2015 – Invitation to persons for adoption of orphans is contrary to law as no adoption of a child can be permitted without the involvement of CARA – Stringent action shall be taken by the State Governments/Union Territories against agencies / individuals who are responsible for indulging in this illegal activity

Jun 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH IN RE CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN CHILDREN PROTECTION HOMES ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) SMW (C) No.…

Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000- In all cases where the accused was above 16 years but below 18 years of age on the date of occurrence, the proceedings pending in the court would continue and be taken to the logical end subject to an exception that upon finding the juvenile to be guilty, the court would not pass an order of sentence

Oct 18, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATYA DEO @ BHOOREY — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ. )…

Juvenile Justice

Death Penalty Cannot Be Imposed By Giving Retrospective Effect To POCSO Amendment To An Offence Committed Prior To Amendment HELD “The punishment of not being released till his last breath is punitive enough to send a signal to the society and it cannot be that only the death sentence can send a right signal”

Jun 17, 2020 sclaw

Death Penalty Cannot Be Imposed By Giving Retrospective Effect To POCSO Amendment To An Offence Committed Prior To Amendment: SC [Read Order] Mehal Jain 17 Jun 2020 12:08 PM “The…

Juvenile Justice

A Child In Conflict With Law Cannot Be Kept In Jail Or Police Lockup At Any Circumstances: SC HELD “We make it clear that the Juvenile Justice Boards are not meant to be silent spectators and pass orders only when a matter comes before them. They can take note of the factual situation if it comes to the knowledge of the JJBs

Feb 12, 2020 sclaw

A Child In Conflict With Law Cannot Be Kept In Jail Or Police Lockup At Any Circumstances: SC [Read Order] Akshita Saxena 12 Feb 2020 5:13 PM “We make it…

Juvenile Justice

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – Section 2(33) – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 304 – Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 – Sections 2(k), 2(l), and 15 – Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 – Section 2(h) – Offences Prescribing Max Sentence Of More Than 7 Years But Not Providing Minimum Sentence Are Not ‘Heinous Offences’, But ‘Serious Offences’

Jan 9, 2020 sclaw

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHILPA MITTAL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B read with Section 420 – Cheating – The case involves fraudulent transactions by accused in connivance with Indian Bank officials resulting in interest-free advances to the petitioners – The main issue is whether the petitioners were involved in cheating the bank and if they availed any undue benefit from the fraudulent transactions – The petitioners argued that they were not involved in the cheating, had not availed any undue benefit, and that the transactions were normal business dealings – The court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, upholding the Trial Court’s conviction of the petitioners for cheating the bank through unauthorized transactions.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 1663 days – The State of U.P. filed a SLP against an order dated 13.11.2009 by the Allahabad High Court, with a delay of 1,633 days – The main issue was the condonation of the significant delay in filing the SLP – The State argued that the delay was due to the time taken for obtaining legal opinion and permissions, and later, the realization that the appeal was not filed initially – The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the SLP was also dismissed – The court found the explanation for the delay unsatisfactory, especially since the State was aware of the High Court’s order when it was passed – The court did not find sufficient cause to condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the SLP.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Property Matters

Partition Suit – The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur – The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers – The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers – The respondents maintain that the property valuation and shares were appropriately determined by the approved Valuer and upheld by both the Trial Court and High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in revaluating the property or altering the determined shares of the parties – The Court emphasized the importance of family ties over property disputes and suggested alternative dispute resolution methods for amicable settlements – The Court referenced the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Company Private Limited, advocating for ADR in family-related property disputes – The Supreme Court concluded that revisiting the valuation and partition would only prolong litigation and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Municipal Laws

West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 – Rule 50 – Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta’s order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 – The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court – They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly pressuring them due to the contempt proceedings – The respondent claims that the appellants violated the sanctioned building plan, justifying the High Court’s direction for an enquiry – The Supreme Court allowed the appellants to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, ensuring their objections would be considered objectively without prejudice from the contempt or writ proceedings – The court expressed reservations about the High Court’s exercise of writ jurisdiction in a private dispute and suggested the civil court as the appropriate forum for grievances – The appeal was disposed of with the appellants given the liberty to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, without cost order.

May 5, 2024 sclaw