(S.A. Bobde, L. Nageswara Rao and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ.)
Ballu ____________________________________________ Appellant;
v.
State of Madhya Pradesh ____________________________ Respondent.
M.A. No. 301 of 2018 In Criminal Appeal No. 1617 of 2018 [Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 6037/2014], decided on December 12, 2018
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Order dated 11.8.2014 is recalled qua Ballu @ Dharmendra and the special leave petition is restored to its original number.
3. Leave granted.
4. Ballu @ Dharmendra, the appellant was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment by judgment dated 19.07.1999 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chanchoda, Guna, M.P. which has been confirmed by the High Court.
5. Thereafter, the appellant filed an application claiming that he was a juvenile on 01.11.1996, the date of incident. On 17.08.2018, this Court ordered an inquiry into the alleged juvenility of the appellant. The learned District and Sessions Judge, Guna, M.P. has after evidence come to the conclusion that the date of birth of the appellant is 03.06.1979 and, therefore, on 01.11.1996, his age was 17 years, 4 months and 29 days. It is clear that the appellant was therefore, not liable to be convicted under the Indian Penal code read with Code of Criminal Procedure. The appellant’s case could have been dealt with only under the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short, “the Act of 2000”). There is no dispute before us that the present case is governed by this Act of 2000 since the offence was committed when the said Act was in force. Having regard to the provisions of the Act of 2000, we are of the view that the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to the appellant needs to be set aside and hereby set aside vide Section 16 of the Act of 2000. Undisputedly, the appellant has already completed 4 years, 10 months and 3 days in custody. The appellant could not have been placed under supervision of Probation Officer for a period not exceeding 3 years vide Section 15(3) of the Act of 2000.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant relied on a order dated 02.04.2012 of this Court in the case of Manmohan v. State of M.P. (Crl.M.P. No. 18091/2011 in SLP(Crl.) No. 9580/2009). Being in agreement with the said view, we direct that the appellant be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
7. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
8. M.A. No. 301/2018 stands allowed.
MA NO. 301/2018 in SLP(CRL.) NO. 6037/2014
Ballu @ Dharmendra ______________________________ Petitioner
v.
The State of Madhya Pradesh _____________________ Respondent.
(APPLN. FOR PERMISSION TO RAISE CLAIM OF JUVENILITY, OFFICE REPORT FOR DIRECTION)
Date: 12-12-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today.
(Before S.A. Bobde, L. Nageswara Rao and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Raj Kishor Choudhary, AOR
Mr. Shakeel Ahmed, Adv.
Mr. Anupam Bhati, Adv.
Mr. Vikram Patralekh, Adv.
Ms. Chitranjali Negi, adv.
Mr. Ashok Shrivastava, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR
Mr. Manish Yadav, Adv.
Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
9. Order dated 11.8.2014 is recalled qua Ballu @ Dharmendra and SLP is restored to its original number.
10. Leave granted.
11. The appellant be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
12. The appeal is disposed of.
13. M.A. No. 301/2018 stands allowed.
14. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
———
