Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses Plea for FIR Registration in Child Abuse Case, Citing Non-Applicability of Juvenile Justice Act Provisions

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgement, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a petition filed for the registration of an FIR under various sections of the IPC and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The case, titled Master Laksh (CNCP) v. State of Haryana and others, dealt with the alleged physical abuse and threats against a minor.

The court delved into the applicability of the Juvenile Justice Act, assessing whether the petitioner, a minor, fell under the definition of ‘child in need of care and protection’ as per the Act.

The petitioner, a 10-year-old child, through his mother, alleged physical abuse and threats by his uncles. The police, after investigation, deemed the allegations false, leading the petitioner to approach the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for directions to register an FIR.

Justice Deepak Gupta, presiding over the case, meticulously analyzed the definitions under the Juvenile Justice Act. The Court observed, “It is held that the case of petitioner, in the facts and circumstances of this case, does not fall within the scope of ‘child in need of care and protection’.” The Court also noted that the complaints were investigated and found to be baseless.

The judgment highlighted the nuances of the Juvenile Justice Act, particularly the definitions of ‘child in conflict with law’ and ‘child in need of care and protection’. The Court also referenced the Supreme Court’s interpretation of these definitions in the case of “Exploitation of Children in Orphanages in the State of Tamil Nadu v. Union of India & Ors.”

The Court dismissed the petition, stating, “Having regard to all the aforesaid discussion, no direction is required to be issued to any of the official respondents.” However, it allowed the petitioner the liberty to seek alternative remedies in accordance with the law.

Date of Decision: January 30, 2024

Master Laksh (CNCP) v. State of Haryana and others

 

Latest Legal News