Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Article 21-A Cannot Be Held Hostage to Transfer Preferences: Allahabad High Court Upholds Teacher Redeployment to Enforce Pupil–Teacher Ratio Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contract Or Travel Beyond Pleadings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes ₹5.18 Crore Award Director’ in GeM Clause 29 Does Not Mean ‘Independent Director’: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Technical Disqualification Section 25(3) Is Sacrosanct – Removal of a Trademark Cannot Rest on a Defective Notice: Delhi High Court Not Every Broken Promise Is Rape: Delhi High Court Draws Clear Line Between ‘Suspicion’ and ‘Grave Suspicion’ in False Promise to Marry Case Section 37 Is Not A Second Appeal On Merits: Delhi High Court Refuses To Re-Appreciate Evidence In Challenge To Arbitral Award Recovery After Retirement Is Clearly Impermissible: Bombay High Court Shields Retired Teacher From ₹2.80 Lakh Salary Recovery Paying Tax Does Not Legalise Illegality: Bombay High Court Refuses to Shield Alleged Unauthorized Structure Beneficial Pension Scheme Cannot Be Defeated By Cut-Off Dates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs EPFO To Follow Sunil Kumar B. Guidelines On Higher Pension Claims Equity Aids the Vigilant, Not Those Who Sleep Over Their Rights: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses to Revive 36-Year-Old Pay Parity Claim Students Cannot Be Penalised For Legislative Invalidity: Supreme Court Protects Degrees Granted Before 2005 Yash Pal Verdict Restructuring Without Fulfilment of Conditions Cannot Defeat Insolvency: Supreme Court Reaffirms Default as the Sole Trigger Under Section 7 IBC Section 100-A CPC Slams The Door On Intra-Court Appeals In RERA Matters”: Allahabad High Court Declares Special Appeal Not Maintainable Mental Distance Between ‘May Be’ and ‘Must Be’ Is Long: Patna High Court Acquits Six in Murder Case Built on Broken Chain of Circumstances Where Corruption Takes Roots, Rule of Law Is Replaced by Rule of Transaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar Mere Voter List and Corrected SSC Certificate Cannot Prove Paternity: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects 21-Year-Old Bid for DNA Test in Partition Appeal Section 147 NI Act Makes Offence Compoundable At Any Stage: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Concurrent Convictions in Cheque Bounce Case After Settlement Bald Allegations of Adultery Based on Suspicion Cannot Dissolve a Marriage: Jharkhand High Court Once a Document Is Admitted in Evidence, Its Stamp Defect Cannot Be Reopened: Madras High Court

High Court Sets Aside Dismissal of Juvenile Appeal on Technical Grounds

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has set aside the dismissal of an appeal filed by a juvenile petitioner on the grounds of being time-barred. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Karamjit Singh, presiding over the case, emphasized the court's duty to impart justice and directed the matter to be reconsidered on its merits without insisting on technicalities.

The petitioner, Mohd. Israr, a child in conflict with the law, had challenged the order of the Principal Magistrate of the Juvenile Justice Board, which erroneously treated him as an adult. The appeal against this order was dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge solely based on the limitation period for filing the appeal. However, the petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner, being a minor, lacked knowledge of legal technicalities and requested the court to condone the delay in filing the appeal.

Justice Karamjit Singh, in his judgment, expressed disappointment over the dismissal of the appeal and stated, "It is the duty of the Court to impart justice...the Court should have decided the matter in question on merits without going into hyper technical ground of limitation, while keeping in mind the fact that the petitioner is a juvenile." The State counsel also concurred with the petitioner's contention, acknowledging that the appeal should have been decided on its merits rather than on technical grounds.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the petition, setting aside the dismissal order and remanding the matter back to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge for fresh consideration on its merits. The court directed both parties to appear before the concerned court on July 4, 2023.

This landmark decision reinforces the principle that the court's primary responsibility is to ensure justice is served, particularly in cases involving juveniles. The judgment highlights the importance of considering the unique circumstances and limitations faced by minors in the legal process, advocating a more compassionate and holistic approach towards the administration of justice.

Date of Decision: 02.06.2023

Mohd. Israr  vs State of Haryana

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Mohd.-Israr-vs-State-PH-HC-02-June-23.pdf"]

Latest Legal News