Delhi High Court
Ranvir vs State on 18 September, 2015
#18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 18.09.2015
W.P.(CRL) 1503/2015
RANVIR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajay Verma and Ms. Srishti
Banerjee, Advocates
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Richa Kapoor, ASC (Criminal)
with Mr. Ashish Negi and Mr. Rohit
Kapoor, Advocates and SI Yogesh
Kumar, PS- Bhajanpura, Delhi
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)
1. The present is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Code') praying for a direction to the respondent to release
the petitioner on parole for a period of three months.
2. When the petition came up for hearing on 31.07.2015 before this
Court, I perused the nominal roll qua the petitioner. The nominal roll
revealed that the petitioner is 29 years of age and had been sentenced for life
imprisonment upon conviction for offences under sections
394/397/302/411/34 IPC committed on 16.04.2004. The petitioner has
already undergone more than 11 years' incarceration without remission.
3. At that juncture, I had asked Ms. Richa Kapoor, learned Additional
Standing Counsel (Criminal) to ascertain the age of the petitioner at the time
of the commission of the offence for which he had been convicted. Ms.
Kapoor, learned Additional Standing Counsel (Criminal) did what is
expected from every counsel on behalf of the State. After conducting an
enquiry, Ms. Richa Kapoor, learned Additional Standing Counsel (Criminal)
filed in Court a copy of the certificate dated 08.09.2015 issued by Kanhaiya
Public Secondary School, West Karawal Nagar, Delhi qua the date of birth
of the petitioner. Along with the said certificate is a copy of the Admission
Form dated 14.04.1993, filled in by the father of the petitioner at the time of
taking admission, supported by an affidavit of the father of the petitioner.
4. A perusal of the said documents reveals that the petitioner's date of
birth is 06.05.1986. The said documents have been duly verified by the State
and found to be correct. Therefore, admittedly on the date of commission of
the offence, the petitioner was 17 years 11 months and 10 days old.
5. On 16.09.2015 when the matter came up for hearing, I had asked
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, whether they would
like to move an application under section 7A of the Juvenile Justice (Care
and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 in this behalf. Mr. Verma, learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has handed over in Court today
the said application duly supported by an affidavit. The same is taken on
record. The Registry is directed to number it.
6. In a nutshell, the application states that the petitioner could not have
been sentenced for the commission of the said offence as he was a juvenile
on the date of the commission of the offence.
7. In the present case, it is observed that it is an admitted position that the
petitioner was born on 06.05.1986. It is also observed that the petitioner has
been convicted and sentenced, as aforesaid, for the commission of an offence
committed by him on 16.04.2004. Therefore, the petitioner was a juvenile at
the time when he is stated to have committed the offence. In my view, he
can never be compensated for the more than 11 years of incarceration that he
has undergone.
8. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the landmark decision of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jitendra Singh vs. State of U.P. reported as
(2013) 11 SCC 193, the conviction imposed by the trial court on the
petitioner is sustained while setting aside and quashing the sentence awarded
to him.
9. The matter is remitted to the Juvenile Justice Board for further
proceedings in accordance with law.
10. The trial court is directed to transmit the papers, proceedings, evidence
and all record pertaining to the subject trial to the concerned Juvenile Justice
Board as expeditiously as possible.
11. The State is directed to produce the petitioner before the Juvenile
Justice Board on 24.09.2015 at 11.00 A.M.
12. Before parting, I would like to state that the petitioner shall owe a debt
of gratitude to Ms. Richa Kapoor, learned Additional Standing Counsel
(Criminal) appearing on behalf of the State for her prompt assistance in the
present petition.
13. The present writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
14. A copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties under
signature of the Court Master. A copy of this order be sent to the
Superintendent, Central Jail, Tihar for necessary information and
compliance.
SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J
SEPTEMBER 18, 2015/dn
