CourtKutchehry.com
Supreme CourtDivision Bench

C. Elumalai vs State of Tamil Nadu

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 26 October 1984 · Citation: AIR 1985 SC 118 : (1985) CriLJ 510 : (1985) 1 Crimes 656 : (1984) 2 SCALE 645 : (1984) 4 SCC 539 : (1985) 1 SCR 1057

HON’BLE JUDGES
R. B. Mishra, J · E. S. Venkataramiah, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Andhra Pradesh Borstal Schools Act, 1925 — Section 10A · Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 433A · Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 · Tamil Nadu Borstal Schools Act, 1925 — Section 10, 10A
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 981 of 1984
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 362 words

E.S. Venkataramiah, J.—We have heard Shri Navin Malhotra, amicus curiae, and the learned Attorney-General for the State of Tamil Nadu. In the Slate of Andhra Pradesh v. Vallabhapuram Ravi (1984) (2) SC 386 (Criminal Appeal No. 254 of 1984) in which judgment was delivered on September 14, 1984 this Court has held that adolescent offenders kept in a Borstal School by virtue of orders made by the State Government u/s 10A of the Andhra Borstal Schools Act, 1925 cannot be detained in the Borstal School or in any other place after they have attained 23 years of age and that they should be released. The provisions of the Tamil Nadu Borstal Schools Act, 1925 are identical with the provisions of the Andhra Borstal Schools Act, 1925. In the judgment referred to above the decision of the Madras High Court in In re. Ganapati 1983 Criminal Law Journal 509 which had taken the view that after Section 433A of the CrPC, 1973 came into force a person who was convicted of an offence punishable u/s 302 of Indian Penal Code but sentenced to imprisonment for life and who was by virtue of an order passed u/s 10A of the Tamil Nadu Borstal Schools Act, 1925 detained in a Borstal School could not be released before he completed 14 years of detention has also been overruled. In the circumstances it has to be held that the State Government of Tamil Nadu cannot keep any adolescent offender who is convicted of the capital offence but sentenced to imprisonment of life in respect of whom an order is made u/s 10A of the Tamil Nadu Borstal Schools Act in a Borstal School or in any other kind of detention after he has attained 23 years of age. We, therefore, direct the Government of the State of Tamil Nadu to release all such inmates of the Borstal Schools in Tamil Nadu who have attained 23 years of age forthwith.

2.

If the petitioner C. Elumalai satisfies the above condition he is also entitled to be released and if he is not in detention he shall not be taken back into custody. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.