TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the age of a person claiming juvenile status under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 is to be determined with reference to the date of the offence or the date when the person is first brought before the competent authority. (ii) Whether the concurrent finding that the appellant was above the prescribed age on the relevant date could be interfered with.
Issue (i): Whether the age of a person claiming juvenile status under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 is to be determined with reference to the date of the offence or the date when the person is first brought before the competent authority.
Analysis: The scheme of the Act, including the definitions, the provisions governing inquiry, and the special procedure before the competent authority, shows that the determination of juvenile status is linked to the stage when the person is brought or appears before that authority. Section 32 contemplates an inquiry into the age of a person brought before the competent authority and records the age so found as the true age for the purposes of the Act. Section 3 also indicates that the Act operates even where a person ceases to be a juvenile during the course of inquiry, which would be unnecessary if the date of offence were decisive. The preamble and objects of the Act support a construction focused on care and treatment during investigation, inquiry and trial, not on the age at the time of the offence.
Conclusion: The relevant date is the date when the person is first brought or appears before the competent authority, not the date of the offence.
Issue (ii): Whether the concurrent finding that the appellant was above the prescribed age on the relevant date could be interfered with.
Analysis: The finding on age was based on evidence, including medical examination and other material, and had been concurrently upheld by the appellate and revisional courts. No legal infirmity or perversity was shown in the appreciation of evidence warranting interference.
Conclusion: The finding of fact on age was sustained and did not call for interference.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed because the statutory test for juvenile status was held to depend on the date of first production before the competent authority, and the factual finding that the appellant was over the prescribed age on that date remained undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: Under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986, juvenile status is to be determined by reference to the date on which the person is brought or appears before the competent authority, and not by reference to the date of commission of the offence.
TaxTMI 
