R.K.Tarun v. Union of India and Ors

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. NOVEMBER 19, 2015 kks

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Pronounced on: November 19, 2015 R.K. TARUN ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner-in-person. Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with Mr. C.M. Manaktala & Mr. Kunal Punj, Advs. for R-1 & 2. Ms. Zubeda Begum, Adv. for GNCTD. Mr. Dharmesh Sharma, Member Secretary, DSLSA & Mr. Surinder S. Rathi, OSD, DSLSA. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW Ms. G. ROHINI, CHIEF JUSTICE 1. In this petition filed by way of Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner seeks a declaration that Rule 12(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007 and Rule 12(3) of the Delhi Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2009 which prescribe the procedure to be followed for determination of age of a juvenile in conflict with law, are ultra vires and unconstitutional being violative of the Constitution of India. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. 3. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short ‗Act') has been enacted consolidating and amending the law relating to juveniles in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection by providing proper care, protection and treatment by catering to their development needs and by adopting a child-friendly approach in the adjudication and disposition of matters in the best interest of children and for their ultimate rehabilitation. 4. Section 2(k) of the Juvenile Justice Act defines ‗juvenile' or ‗child' as a person who has not completed 18th year of age. The expression ‗juvenile in conflict with law' is defined under Section 2(l) of the Juvenile Justice Act as a juvenile who is alleged to have committed an offence and has not completed 18th year of age as on the date of commission of such offence. 5. Section 4 of the said Act provides for constitution of one or more Juvenile Justice Boards by the State Government for every district for exercising the powers and discharging the duties conferred or imposed on such Boards in relation to juveniles in conflict with law. Every Juvenile Justice Board (for short JJB) shall consist of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class as the case may be and two social workers. As per Section 6 of the Juvenile Justice Act, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the JJB shall have power to deal exclusively with all proceedings under the Juvenile Justice Act relating to juvenile in conflict with law. Section 14 of the Juvenile Justice Act provides that where a juvenile having been charged with the offence is produced before a JJB, it shall hold the inquiry in accordance with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act and may make such order in relation to the juvenile as it deems fit. The various orders that may be passed by JJB regarding juveniles are enumerated under Section 15 of the Act. 6. The issue raised in the present writ petition relates to the procedure to be followed for determination of the age of the person brought before the JJB under any of the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act. Section 49 of the Act which provides for presumption and determination of age reads as under: ―49. Presumption and determination of age. – (1) Where it appears to a competent authority that person brought before it under any of the provisions of this Act (otherwise than for the purpose of giving evidence) is a juvenile or the child, the competent authority shall make due inquiry so as to the age of that person and for that purpose shall take such evidence as may be necessary (but not an affidavit) and shall record a finding whether the person is a juvenile or the child or not, stating his age as nearly as may be. (2) No order of a competent authority shall be deemed to have become invalid merely by any subsequent proof that the person in respect of whom the order has been made is not a juvenile or