High Court Kerala High Court

Kalanthar Shafi vs State Rep. By The Station House … on 11 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
Kalanthar Shafi vs State Rep. By The Station House … on 11 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 4151 of 2008()


1. KALANTHAR SHAFI, 16 YEARS, S/O.MOOSA
                      ...  Petitioner
2. ABDUL SAMEER, 17 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM

                        Vs



1. STATE REP. BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SURESH KUMAR KODOTH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :11/11/2008

 O R D E R
                              R. BASANT, J.
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                     Crl.M.C.No. 4151 of 2008
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
           Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008

                                 O R D E R

The petitioners face allegations in a crime registered

alleging offences punishable, inter alia, under Section 153 A r/w

149 I.P.C. Allegations raised in the F.I.R against the accused

persons are indeed grave and serious.

2. The petitioners have come before this Court to report

to the Court the fact that they are juveniles in conflict with the

law as defined under Section 2(l) of the Juvenile Justice

(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, they having not

completed the age of 18 years on the date of the alleged offence.

No semblance of material has been placed before Court to satisfy

the court that they are aged below 18 years on the date of the

alleged offence. Though time was given to produce relevant

materials, no such documents have been produced so far. The

petitioners, it is stated, are students, who had attended school. To

me it appears that it will not be difficult for them to produce at

Crl.M.C.No. 4151 of 2008
2

least the school documents to show the correct age of the petitioners.

3. Thus in as much as no material is placed before this Court to

conclude that the petitioners were juvenile on the date of the

commission of the offence, I am satisfied that no direction under

Section 482 Cr.P.C. need be issued. Any police officer/arresting

officer or who wants to proceed against the petitioners will certainly

have to consider whether the petitioners are juvenile in conflict with

the law as defined under Section 2(l) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and

Protection of Children) Act. It is open for the petitioners also to

produce appropriate documents to satisfy the Investigating Officer or

the court as the case may be that they are juveniles in conflict with the

law and deserve to be treated and proceeded against only in accordance

with the provisions of the said Act. No further or specific directions

appear to be necessary in the facts and circumstances of this case.

4. This Crl.M.C. is dismissed with the above observations.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm