Rohitdas vs State Of M.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 17910 MP

                                                             1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                 AT INDORE
                                                      BEFORE
                                          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                              ON THE 27 th OF OCTOBER, 2023
                                             CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 958 of 2009

                          BETWEEN:-
                          ROHITDAS S/O BHAGWANDAS @ BHAGVATDAS
                          BAIRAGI, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                          CHOUKIDARI     R/O:    GOKULKUNDI     THANA,
                          UMRAOGANJ, DISTRICT RAISEN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....APPELLANT
                          (BY SHRI SHIVKUMAR GOLWALKAR - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          STATE OF M.P. THROUGH P.S. BIAORA, DISTRICT
                          RAJGARH (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....RESPONDENT
                          (BY SHRI SAGAR MULEY - PANEL LAWYER)

                                T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                          following:
                                                              ORDER

1. In compliance of the order dated 29.9.2023 record of S.T.

No.341/2008 (State of M.P. Vs. Rohit Das and others) judgment dated 23.2.2010 has been received.

2. With the consent of both the parties, matter is heard finally.

3. Appellant has preferred this criminal appeal under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 16.7.2009 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Biaora, District Rajgarh (M.P.) in S.T. No.342/2008, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under

Signature Not Verified Section 377 of IPC (two counts) and sentenced to 10 years R.I. (two counts) Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 27-Oct-23 6:58:57 PM

and fine of Rs.10,000/- on each count, with usual default stipulation.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was juvenile at the time of incident. The coordinate bench of this Court in CRR No.70/2010 (Rohitdas Vs. State of M.P.) vide order dated 27.1.2010 has already decided that the appellant Rohitdas was juvenile on the date of offence. The aforesaid order was not challenged by the State, therefore, the order attained finality. He further submits that on the basis of the aforesaid order, in S.T. No.341/2008 (State of M.P. Vs. Rohitdas and others), being a juvenile appellant Rohitdas has been sent to the Juvenile Justice Board for trial of the offence as per the law, but in the instant case the trial Court has not considered

the aforesaid material fact that appellant was juvenile at the time of incident. Hence, he prays that the impugned judgment and sentence passed by the trial Court be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the trial Court for its fresh decision.

5. Counsel for the respondent/State opposes the prayer by submitting that the same fact was not raised before the trial Court, therefore, at this stage matter could not be remanded back to the Juvenile Justice Board.

6. Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the entire record of S.T. No.342/2008 (State of M.P. Vs. Rohitdas and others) judgment dated 16.7.2009 and S.T. No.341/2008 (State of M.P. Vs. Rohitdas and others) judgment dated 23.2.2010 and all other documents.

7. From perusal of the order dated 27.1.2010 passed by the coordinate bench of this Court in CRR No.70/2010 in the case of Rohitdas Vs. State of M.P., it is crystal clear that this Court has already decided that the appellant was juvenile at the time of incident. The order dated 27.1.2010 was not challenged Signature Not Verified Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 27-Oct-23 6:58:57 PM

by the respondent/State before any higher court, therefore, the said order has attained finality. In both the Sessions Trial the date of incident is similar, therefore, on the point of juvenility of the appellant, the order passed by the coordinate bench of this Court in CRR No.70/2010 is also applicable in the instant case that appellant was juvenile at the time of incident.

8. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the sessions court is not competent to conduct the trial against a juvenile person, but the trial Court has not considered the same fact while passing the judgment, therefore, the impugned judgment and sentence passed by the trial Court appears to be erroneous and against the law and it cannot be sustained.

9. In view of the aforesaid, this appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment dated 16.7.2009 in respect of the appellant Rohitdas is hereby set aside and the trial Court is directed to send the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board for conducting the trial against the appellant Rohitdas as per the rules and the Juvenile Justice Board shall decide the matter afresh in accordance with law.

10. Let a copy of this judgment along with the record of S.T. No.341/2008 and S.T. No.342/2008 be sent to the concerned trial Court for necessary action.

C.C. as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE trilok

Signature Not Verified Signed by: TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Signing time: 27-Oct-23 6:58:57 PM