Latest news with #CareandProtectionofChildren)Rules
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
15 years after murder, Karnataka high court says convict juvenile, orders Rs 50,000 compensation
Bengaluru: Fifteen years after a murder in 2011, the Karnataka high court has ruled that the prime accused, who spent 13 years in prison, was a juvenile at the time and should never have been tried as an adult. The court observation comes as a relief for Channappa, who was convicted in 2018 for killing his sister's husband in Yadgir district. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. The high court upheld the conviction for the crime he committed but voided the sentence, ordering Rs 50,000 compensation for the wrongful trial under the new Juvenile Justice Rules, 2025. Back in April 2011, 16-year-old Channappa from Halisagar in Yadgir district and his friend Saibanna had killed 23-year-old Bheemaraya with a sword after the latter eloped with his sister Lakshmi, defying the family's wishes. They attacked him late night when he was returning from a movie with his friend Bhimanna. Bhimanna was injured in the attack. You Can Also Check: Bengaluru AQI | Weather in Bengaluru | Bank Holidays in Bengaluru | Public Holidays in Bengaluru Despite being a minor, Channappa was tried as an adult by the Yadgir sessions court and, in 2018, sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs 2,000. His co-accused, Saibanna, died before the trial concluded. Channappa challenged his conviction on several grounds, including the reliability of prosecution witnesses and discrepancies in the nature of the injuries inflicted. He further maintained that he was only 16 years old at the time and should have been treated as a juvenile. Subsequently, he approached the high court. The division bench of Justices Sunil Dutt Yadav and Ramachandra D Huddar found the trial was flawed from the start and highlighted that authorities should identify juveniles at the first point of contact by adhering to the prescribed rules strictly. This involves verifying the offender's age when police encounter a suspect with doubts about juvenility, and again during remand by a magistrate. The court emphasized the importance of the recently enacted Karnataka State Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2025, which aim to prevent juveniles from being wrongly incarcerated as adults. Given the sentence already served, with Channappa spending 13 years in jail, the bench also deemed it unnecessary to refer the matter to the Juvenile Justice Board under Section 20 of the Act of 2000. Instead, it directed the board to award Channappa a compensation under Rule 6 (xiv) (f) of The Karnataka State Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2025, without requiring a new enquiry into his juvenility or compensation. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Raksha Bandhan wishes , messages and quotes !
Indian Express
24-07-2025
- Indian Express
37 years after raping a minor, Rajasthan man, now 53, is declared a juvenile
Thirty-seven years after he raped an 11-year-old girl in Rajasthan's Ajmer, a man was declared a juvenile by the Supreme Court, which upheld his conviction by lower courts but directed him to appear before the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) instead. The man, now almost 53, was convicted and sentenced in February 1993 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kishangarh, Ajmer, for rape and wrongful confinement. This was upheld by the Rajasthan High Court in July last year. However, his lawyers claimed before the SC bench, comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, that he was a juvenile at the time of the incident in November 1988. They said that his date of birth is September 14, 1972, and therefore, on the date of the incident, his age would be 16 years 2 months and 3 days. Since he was a juvenile, the proceedings as held cannot sustain, especially the sentence, they said. They had also prayed that an inquiry be held to determine his age 'so that he may get the benefits of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2007.' In January this year, the SC directed the Ajmer District and Sessions Judge to conduct an inquiry into the claims of the petitioner, complete its findings in eight weeks and report to the SC. After the school admission and other documents confirmed his date of birth in September 1972, the SC ruled, 'The Appellant was therefore a juvenile on the date of commission of the crime.' With the issue of age not being raised in earlier courts, the SC said that 'authoritative judgments passed by this Court … (have) categorically held that the plea of juvenility can be raised before any court and has to be recognised at any stage, even after disposal of the case.' 'Consequently, the sentence as imposed by the Trial Court and upheld by the High Court will have to be set aside, as the same cannot sustain. We order accordingly,' the SC said, referring the case to the Board for passing appropriate orders and directed the man to appear before the Board on September 15, 2025.
