https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311105 The SC ruled that the Juvenile Justice Act 2000 does not apply to the accused, who was over 16 years old at the time of the offense and had turned 18 before April 1, 2001. The Court emphasized that the 2000 Act's provisions apply only if the accused was below 18 as of that date. Consequently, the protections under the 2000 Act were not extended, and the trial court was instructed to proceed based on the precedent set in Pratap Singh's case, applying the 1986 Act. The appeal was resolved in line with these principles. en-us Mon, 28 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Dec 2023 17:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311105 The SC ruled that the Juvenile Justice Act 2000 does not apply to the accused, who was over 16 years old at the time of the offense and had turned 18 before April 1, 2001. The Court emphasized that the 2000 Act's provisions apply only if the accused was below 18 as of that date. Consequently, the protections under the 2000 Act were not extended, and the trial court was instructed to proceed based on the precedent set in Pratap Singh's case, applying the 1986 Act. The appeal was resolved in line with these principles. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 28 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311105