Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal  ||  Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination  ||  Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act  ||  Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal  ||  Allahabad High Court: Law Treats All Equally, State Cannot Gain Undue Benefit from Delay Condonation  ||  SC: SARFAESI Act Was Not Applicable in Nagaland Before its 2021 Adoption, Dismisses Creditor’s Plea  ||  SC: Lis Pendens Applies To Money Suits on Mortgaged Property, Including Ex Parte Proceedings  ||  Kerala HC: Civil Courts Cannot Grant Injunctions in NCLT Matters and Such Orders Can Be Set Aside  ||  Bombay High Court: Technical Breaks to Temporary Employees Cannot Deny Maternity Leave Benefits  ||  NCLAT: Appellate Jurisdiction Limited to Orders Deciding Parties’ Rights, Not Procedural Directions    

R.K. Tarun v. Union of India and Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (19 Nov 2015)

Delhi Juvenile Justice Rules not unconstitutional

MANU/DE/3552/2015

Miscellaneous

The Delhi High Court rejected a petition calling the procedure for determining juvenility of an accused unconstitutional and in conflict with the law. Despite there being a difference between the Delhi Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Rules, 2009 and the Model Rules, the Court directed authorities to follow the State rules. It determined that though State rules gave a different priority to documents produced in evidence of the age of an accused, and different courts followed different procedures, such did not render them unjustified. Further, unless the Rules were shown to be contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India, arbitrary or unreasonable, a court could not “sit in judgment over [Parliament’s] wisdom”.

Relevant : Ashwini Kumar Saxena v. State of Madhya Pradesh, MANU/SC/0753/2012 Section 49 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 Act

Tags : JUVENILE   PRIORITY   PROOF   RULES   VARIATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved