1

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.16 OF 2008

DINA NATH @ DAULAT                         Appellant (s)

                     VERSUS

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH                  Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J.

The only point urged in support of the appeal is that the appellant was  

minor within the meaning of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)  

Act, 2000 (in short "2000 Act").  Reference is also made to the amendment of the  

expression "juvenile in conflict with law" in terms of Section 2(l) as amended by Act  

33 of 2006 with effect from 22.8.2006.  Reference is also made to the explanation  

appended to Section 20 by the said amendment.  It is the stand of the appellant that  

on the date of occurrence he was minor as his date of birth is 6.3.1973.   

Learned counsel for the respondent states that this plea was not raised  

either  before  the  trial  court  or  before  the  High  Court  by  the  appellant.   The  

question about the applicability of 2000 Act and the amendment thereto has to be  

tested on the basis of the evidence.  Though certain documents have been filed to  

substantiate their stand that the appellant was a minor on the date of occurrence i.e.  

on 15.6.1990, the applicability of the amended provisions have to be considered.  In  

the peculiar facts of  this  case,  we set aside the impugned judgment of  the High  

Court  and remit the matter to  the trial  court  to  decide  only  the  question  as  to  

whether the appellant was a juvenile on the date of commission of the offence i.e. on

2

15.6.1990.  We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of  

the  case.   The  trial  court  shall  permit  the  accused  appellant  to  produce  such  

evidence  as  is  considered  necessary  by  him  to  substantiate  the  aforesaid  plea.  

Similar shall be the case in case of prosecution.

 As the matter is pending since long, let the adjudication be done by the  

end of September, 2009. The accused-appellant shall continue to remain in custody  

till the adjudication is done by the trial court.

We make it clear that the impugned judgment is being set aside only for  

the purpose of adjudicating the plea raised by the appellant that he was minor at  

the time of commission of the offence.  

The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

.....................J. (Dr. Arijit Pasayat)

.....................J. (Asok Kumar Ganguly)

New Delhi; April 23, 2009.