Twarita Gehlot vs State Of Rajasthan (2023:Rj-Jd:29125) on 12 September, 2023
In view of the aforesaid, following the judgment in case of
Om Prakash (supra), the writ petition is disposed of in same
terms.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 34 (1.30 seconds)Chimna Ram vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 23 November, 2023
[2023:RJ-JD:40336] (2 of 2) [CW-10433/2022]
In view of the aforesaid joint submission made at bar, the
present writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment which
was passed by co-ordinate bench of this Court in S.B. Civil Writ
Petition No.870/2008 (Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.)
decided on 30.10.2013.
Surjaram vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:40149) on 26 September, 2024
In the event of filing such representation, the
respondents shall consider and decide the same in the light of
order dated 01.06.2007 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this
Court in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.6698/2003 (Om Prakash
vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Ankush Pandey (Minor) Thru.Father ... vs State Of U.P. & Anr. on 24 July, 2020
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors reported in (2012) 5 SCC 201 however has brought in due concern in matter relating to juvenile where the alleged offences committed by the juvenile are heinous like rape, murder, gang rape etc and has indicated that in such matters the nature and gravity of the offences would be relevant and the minor (juvenile) can not getaway by shielding himself behind the veil of minority. It was held by their Lordship that Juvenile Justice Act was enacted with a laudable object of providing a separate forum for holding trial of children by the juvenile court as it was felt that children became delinquent by force of circumstances and not by choice. Hence, they need to be treated with care and sensitivity, while dealing and trying cases of criminal nature. It was further highlighted by their Lordship that if the conduct of an accused or the method and manner of the commission of the offence indicates evil and well planned design of the accused committing the offence, which indicates more towards the mature skill of an accused than that of a innocent child, then in the absence of any reliable documentary evidence in support of the age of the accused, medical evidence indicating that the accused was a major, cannot be allowed to be ignored by taking shelter of the principle of beneficial legislation like the Juvenile Justice Actsubverting the court of justice, which is meant for minors or innocent law breakers and not accused of mature mind who uses the plea of minority as a ploy to shield and protect himself from the sentence of the offence committed by him.
Manish Kumar Pandey Thru. His Father ... vs State Of U.P. & Anr. on 23 July, 2021
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors reported in (2012) 5 SCC 201 however has brought in due concern in matter relating to juvenile where the alleged offences committed by the juvenile are heinous like rape, murder, gang rape etc and has indicated that in such matters the nature and gravity of the offences would be relevant and the minor (juvenile) can not getaway by shielding himself behind the veil of minority. It was held by their Lordship that Juvenile Justice Act was enacted with a laudable object of providing a separate forum for holding trial of children by the juvenile court as it was felt that children became delinquent by force of circumstances and not by choice. Hence, they need to be treated with care and sensitivity, while dealing and trying cases of criminal nature. It was further highlighted by their Lordship that if the conduct of an accused or the method and manner of the commission of the offence indicates evil and well planned design of the accused committing the offence, which indicates more towards the mature skill of an accused than that of a innocent child, then he cannot be allowed to take shelter of the principle of beneficial legislation like the Juvenile Justice Act subverting the course of justice, which is meant for minors or innocent law breakers and not for on accused of mature mind who uses the plea of minority as a ploy to shield and protect himself from the sentence of the offence committed by him.
Kuldeep Yadav And Anr. vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And ... on 1 April, 2022
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors reported in (2012) 5 SCC 201 however has brought in due concern in matter relating to juvenile where the alleged offences committed by the juvenile are heinous like rape, murder, gang rape etc and has indicated that in such matters the nature and gravity of the offences would be relevant and the minor (juvenile) can not getaway by shielding himself behind the veil of minority. It was held by their Lordship that Juvenile Justice Act was enacted with a laudable object of providing a separate forum for holding trial of children by the juvenile court as it was felt that children became delinquent by force of circumstances and not by choice. Hence, they need to be treated with care and sensitivity, while dealing and trying cases of criminal nature. It was further highlighted by their Lordship that if the conduct of an accused or the method and manner of the commission of the offence indicates evil and well planned design of the accused committing the offence, which indicates more towards the mature skill of an accused than that of a innocent child, then he cannot be allowed to take shelter of the principle of beneficial legislation like the Juvenile Justice Act subverting the course of justice, which is meant for minors or innocent law breakers and not for on accused of mature mind who uses the plea of minority as a ploy to shield and protect himself from the sentence of the offence committed by him.
Aman (Minor) Thru. His Mother Smt. Prema ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 11 January, 2023
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors reported in (2012) 5 SCC 201 however has brought in due concern in matter relating to juvenile where the alleged offences committed by the juvenile are heinous like rape, murder, gang rape etc and has indicated that in such matters the nature and gravity of the offences would be relevant and the minor (juvenile) can not getaway by shielding himself behind the veil of minority. It was held by their Lordship that Juvenile Justice Act was enacted with a laudable object of providing a separate forum for holding trial of children by the juvenile court as it was felt that children became delinquent by force of circumstances and not by choice. Hence, they need to be treated with care and sensitivity, while dealing and trying cases of criminal nature. It was further highlighted by their Lordship that if the conduct of an accused or the method and manner of the commission of the offence indicates evil and well planned design of the accused committing the offence, which indicates more towards the mature skill of an accused than that of a innocent child, then he cannot be allowed to take shelter of the principle of beneficial legislation like the Juvenile Justice Act subverting the course of justice, which is meant for minors or innocent law breakers and not for on accused of mature mind who uses the plea of minority as a ploy to shield and protect himself from the sentence of the offence committed by him.
Sirtaj @ Taj Thru. Brother Aijaz vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 8 April, 2024
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors reported in (2012) 5 SCC 201 however has brought in due concern in matter relating to juvenile where the alleged offences committed by the juvenile are heinous like rape, murder, gang rape etc and has indicated that in such matters the nature and gravity of the offences would be relevant and the minor (juvenile) can not getaway by shielding himself behind the veil of minority. It was held by their Lordship that Juvenile Justice Act was enacted with a laudable object of providing a separate forum for holding trial of children by the juvenile court as it was felt that children became delinquent by force of circumstances and not by choice. Hence, they need to be treated with care and sensitivity, while dealing and trying cases of criminal nature. But when an accused is alleged to have committed heinous offence like rape and murder or any other grave offence when he seizes to be a child on attaining the age of 18 years, but seeks protection of the Juvenile Justice Act under the ostensible plea of being a minor, should such an accused be allowed to be tried by a Juvenile Court or should he be referred to a competent court of criminal jurisdiction. It is further highlighted by their Lordship by above mentioned decision that if the conduct of an accused or the method and manner of the commission of the offence indicates evil and well planned design of the accused committing the offence, which indicates more towards the mature skill of an accused than that of a innocent child, then in the absence of any reliable documentary evidence in support of the age of the accused, medical evidence indicating that the accused was a major, cannot be allowed to be ignored by taking shelter of the principle of beneficial legislation like the Juvenile Justice Act subverting the court of justice, which is meant for minors or innocent law breakers and not accused of mature mind who uses the plea of minority as a ploy to shield and protect himself from the sentence of the offence committed by him.
Juvenile Accused Anand Thru.Father ... vs State Of U.P. & Another on 28 July, 2021
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors reported in (2012) 5 SCC 201 however has brought in due concern in matter relating to juvenile where the alleged offences committed by the juvenile are heinous like rape, murder, gang rape etc and has indicated that in such matters the nature and gravity of the offences would be relevant and the minor (juvenile) can not getaway by shielding himself behind the veil of minority. It was held by their Lordship that Juvenile Justice Act was enacted with a laudable object of providing a separate forum for holding trial of children by the juvenile court as it was felt that children became delinquent by force of circumstances and not by choice. Hence, they need to be treated with care and sensitivity, while dealing and trying cases of criminal nature. It was further highlighted by their Lordship that if the conduct of an accused or the method and manner of the commission of the offence indicates evil and well planned design of the accused committing the offence, which indicates more towards the mature skill of an accused than that of a innocent child, then he cannot be allowed to take shelter of the principle of beneficial legislation like the Juvenile Justice Act subverting the course of justice, which is meant for minors or innocent law breakers and not for on accused of mature mind who uses the plea of minority as a ploy to shield and protect himself from the sentence of the offence committed by him.
Gaurav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 July, 2022
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors reported in (2012) 5 SCC 201 however has brought in due concern in matter relating to juvenile where the alleged offences committed by the juvenile are heinous like rape, murder, gang rape etc and has indicated that in such matters the nature and gravity of the offences would be relevant and the minor (juvenile) can not getaway by shielding himself behind the veil of minority. It was held by their Lordship that Juvenile Justice Act was enacted with a laudable object of providing a separate forum for holding trial of children by the juvenile court as it was felt that children became delinquent by force of circumstances and not by choice. Hence, they need to be treated with care and sensitivity, while dealing and trying cases of criminal nature. It was further highlighted by their Lordship that if the conduct of an accused or the method and manner of the commission of the offence indicates evil and well planned design of the accused committing the offence, which indicates more towards the mature skill of an accused than that of a innocent child, then he cannot be allowed to take shelter of the principle of beneficial legislation like the Juvenile Justice Act subverting the course of justice, which is meant for minors or innocent law breakers and not for on accused of mature mind who uses the plea of minority as a ploy to shield and protect himself from the sentence of the offence committed by him.