Gurdeep Singh vs State of Punjab

Ram Chand Gupta, J.—The present revision petition has been filed against order dated 28.05.2013 passed by Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Fatehgarh Sahib vide which while conducting the regular inquiry against the petitioner-accused, an application dated 15.04.2013 filed by complainant seeking permission to examine victim-Manpreet Kaur as a witness, was allowed. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order.

Admittedly, present petitioner was held to be juvenile in FIR no. 94 dated 28.07.2010, u/s 354 IPC, police station Fatehgarh Sahib and hence, regular inquiry was being conducted by Juvenile Justice Board, Fatehgarh Sahib. During the course of inquiry, an application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. was moved on behalf of the prosecution for examining victim-Manpreet Kaur. The victim was ordered to be produced before the Board by allowing the said application of prosecution. Aggrieved against the said order passed by the Board, the present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-accused.

Section 52 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (for short, the ''Act'') provides that any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may prefer an appeal to the court of Session. It is pertinent to reproduce the same, which reads as under:-

Appeals. -(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person aggrieved by an order made by a competent authority under this Act may, within thirty days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Court of Session:

Provided that the Court of Session may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.

(2) No appeal shall lie from--

(a) any order of acquittal made by the Board in respect of a juvenile alleged to have committed an offence; or

(b) any order made by a Committee in respect of a finding that a person is not a neglected juvenile.

(3) No second appeal shall lie from any order of the Court of Session passed in appeal under this section.

It is also pertinent to reproduce Section 54 of the Act, which reads as under:-

Procedure in inquiries, appeals and revision proceedings. -(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided by this Act, a competent authority while holding any inquiry under any of the provisions of this Act, shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed and subject thereto, shall follow, as far as may be, the procedure laid down in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) for trials in summons cases.

(2) Save as otherwise expressly provided by or under this Act, the procedure to be followed in hearing appeals or revision proceedings under this Act shall be, as far as practicable, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).

In reply to a specific query of this Court, it has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that u/s 52 of the Act, appeal can be filed if an order is made under the Act. He has further contended that the impugned order has not been passed under any provisions of the Act and that rather the same has been passed on an application filed u/s 311 of Cr.P.C. by the prosecution.

In my view, there is no force in the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner. The inquiry on the allegations is being conducted by the Board u/s 15 of the Act and the procedure prescribed is as per the Code of Criminal Procedure save as otherwise specifically provided by the Act u/s 54 of the Act. As there was no other provision provided under the Act to file an application for additional evidence, an application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. was moved during the inquiry proceedings. However, it cannot be said that the order has not been passed under the Act. Rather, when the inquiry was being held under the Act, all the orders are deemed to have been passed under the Act only, though specific provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure might have been applied. Hence, the present revision petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach court of Sessions by way of appeal against the impugned order passed by Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Fatehgarh Sahib.