Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Parvinder Singh @ Ruby vs State Of Punjab on 30 March, 2015
Bench: Kurian Joseph, Amitava Roy
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.531 OF 2015
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.1003 of 2014)
PARVINDER SINGH @ RUBY .......APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB .......RESPONDENT
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appellant has come in appeal against the conviction
by the Sessions Judge, Bathinda whereby the appellant has been held
guilty of the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- and in
default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3
months. The appeal preferred before the High Court was dismissed by
the impugned order. As the appellant claimed that he was a juvenile
at the time of the offence, on 14.10.2014, this Court passed the
following order:
“The main question raised in this special
leave petition is whether the accused-petitioner
was a juvenile on the date of occurrence of the
crime i.e. on 15th June, 2000. Learned counsel
has placed reliance on the result of
matriculation examination published on March,
2000 issued by Board of School Education, Punjab.
In that view of the matter, we refer the
matter to the Juvenile Justice Board, Bhatinda.
The respondent will produce accused-petitioner
Signature Not Verified
before the Juvenile Justice Board, Bhatinda on or
before 28th October, 2014. In such case, the
Digitally signed by
Satish Kumar Yadav
Date: 2015.03.31
13:45:29 IST
Reason: Juvenile Justice Board after following the
procedure under Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection) Act, 2000 and the Rules framed
therein will decide whether the
accused-petitioner was juvenile on the date of
2
occurrence. The report may be submitted within
three weeks from the date of production of
accused-petitioner.
Post the matter on 1st December, 2014.”
The Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board,
Bhatinda has forwarded a report dated 06.12.2014. Paragraph 2 of
the Report reads as under:
“2. After hearing her, this Board has come to the
conclusion that in view of the certificate of
matriculation, age of Parvinder Singh, at the
time of lodging of FIR No.268 is dated 16.06.2000
was 16 years one month and 21 days. It is
sufficient to hold that at that time, Parvinder
Singh was juvenile”
We have been informed that the appellant has been serving
the sentence for the last around 8 years. We are hence of the view
that it is not necessary to refer to the Board for passing orders
under Sections 15 or 16 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection) Act, 2000. Accordingly, while sustaining the
conviction of the appellant for the aforesaid offence, we quash the
sentence awarded to him and direct the release of the appellant, if
not required in any other case.
The appeal is allowed in the above terms.
..........................J.
(KURIAN JOSEPH)
..........................J.
(AMITAVA ROY)
NEW DELHI;
MARCH 30, 2015.
3
ITEM NO.201 COURT NO.12 SECTION IIB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1003/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02/07/2013
in CRLA No.188/2002 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at
Chandigarh)
PARVINDER SINGH @ RUBY Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondent(s)
(With appln.(s) for bail and permission to file additional
documents and office report)
(For final disposal)
Date : 30/03/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Adv.
Mr.Sounder Rajan, Adv.
Mr.Sriya Raj Chauhan, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Ms.Bonita Singh, Adv.
Mr.Arjun Drona, Adv.
Ms. Naresh Bakshi, Adv.
Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
(SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (Signed order is placed on the file)