In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday quashed a probe against a minor accused of violating the one-way rule on Park Street, citing that the enquiry was not completed within the statutory four-month period as mandated by the Juvenile Justice Act. The decision underscores the court's commitment to protecting children's rights and ensuring speedy justice in juvenile cases.
Court's Emphasis on Timely Justice for Juveniles
The single bench of Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee struck down the probe, emphasizing that the Juvenile Justice Act sets a maximum time limit of four months for concluding such inquiries. The Act allows the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) to extend this period by an additional two months with proper reasons. However, if these timelines are not adhered to, the proceedings must stand terminated, as the term "shall" in the Act is mandatory, especially in cases of petty offences.
Justice Mukherjee's Observations on Child Protection
Justice Mukherjee observed that the Juvenile Justice Act is fundamentally designed for the care and protection of children. Therefore, courts should interpret its provisions generously to benefit the child involved. He stressed that courts must avoid a rigid or overly technical approach and instead favor conclusions that recognize the individual as a child, prioritizing their welfare over procedural technicalities.
Background of the Park Street Incident
The case dates back to November 26, 2023, when the minor, who is the grandson of a retired judge, was allegedly caught violating a one-way rule on Park Street from Loudon Street. It was reported that he was driving a four-wheeler with a blue beacon and a judge board. When a traffic sergeant attempted to stop him, the minor reversed the vehicle, an action that could have led to a fatal accident.
A charge sheet was filed against him on November 28, 2023, and he was initially ordered to be kept at Dhruv Ashram until December 12, 2023. However, he was released on bail the very next day, November 29, 2023. The complaint registered against him included various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Motor Vehicles Act, with the alleged offences carrying a maximum punishment of up to three years.
Legal Challenge and Timeline Analysis
The minor, represented by his father, approached the Calcutta High Court, arguing that the proceedings should be quashed because the inquiry remained inconclusive within the statutory period. Justice Mukherjee noted that since the minor was produced before the JJB on November 28, 2023, the enquiry should have been completed by March 27, 2024. In February 2024, the JJB granted a two-month extension, which should have set the new deadline for May 27, 2024.
Justice Mukherjee highlighted that the timeline specified in Section 14 of the Juvenile Justice Act aims to ensure a speedy inquiry, reduce the repeated appearance of the delinquent before the Board, and minimize the impact of legal complexities on a juvenile's life. This ruling reinforces the importance of adhering to these timelines to protect the rights and well-being of children involved in legal proceedings.
