Source:  Supreme Court 

Why in News? 

A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan held that the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 does not confer on the Juvenile Justice Board any power to review it’s own orders. 

• The Supreme Court held this in the case of Rajni v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025). 

What was the Background of Rajni v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025) Case?   

• The Supreme Court disposed of two criminal appeals that were heard together, since the parties, legal representatives, and issues involved were the same. 
• On 21st February 2023, the Supreme Court directed that SLP (Crl.) D. No. 24862 of 2022 be tagged with SLP (Crl.) No. 11233 of 2022, which was later converted into Criminal Appeal No. 603 of 2025. 
• In Criminal Appeal No. 603 of 2025, the appellant (complainant and mother of the deceased) challenged the order of the Allahabad High Court dated 13th May 2022, which had dismissed her Criminal Revision No. 82 of 2022. 
• The case originated from an application filed by the mother of respondent No. 2 before the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), Meerut, seeking a declaration that he was a juvenile in conflict with law. 
• On 27th August 2021, the JJB dismissed Miscellaneous Case No. 55/2021, holding that respondent No. 2 was not a juvenile as he was above 18 years of age on the date of the incident, i.e., 17th February 2021. 
• Respondent No. 2, through his mother, filed Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 2021 before the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Court, Meerut. 
• On 14th October 2021, the learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside the JJB’s order and held that respondent No. 2 was a juvenile, based on a school certificate showing his date of birth as 8th September 2003. 
• The complainant then filed Criminal Revision No. 82 of 2022 before the High Court, assailing the above decision. 
• On 13th May 2022, the High Court dismissed the revision, upholding the lower court's reliance on the school certificate and ruling out the need for a medical examination. 
• In a parallel bail matter, the JJB had rejected bail to respondent No. 2 on 27th October 2021. 
• Respondent No. 2 then filed Criminal Appeal No. 86 of 2021 before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, who also rejected the bail on 1st December 2021. 
• Respondent No. 2 next filed Criminal Revision No. 234 of 2022 before the High Court, challenging the bail rejections. 
• On 13th May 2022, the High Court allowed the revision, held that gravity of the offence is not a sufficient ground to deny bail to a juvenile, and ordered that respondent No. 2 be enlarged on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties. 
• The complainant, aggrieved by this bail order, filed SLP (Crl.) D. No. 24862 of 2022 before the Supreme Court. 
• On 18th November 2022, the Supreme Court condoned the delay and issued notice in the SLP filed against the High Court order. 
• Later, on 4th February 2025, leave was granted, thereby converting the SLP into a regular criminal appeal.

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Additional District and Sessions Judge and the High Court were justified in holding respondent No. 2 to be a juvenile at the time of the incident. 
• Section 94(2) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 prescribes a clear order of preference for age determination:  
  • first the school matriculation certificate,  
  • then birth certificate from municipal authorities, and 
  • only in the absence of both should medical tests be conducted. 
• The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) erred in ordering a medical examination when school certificates and a municipal birth certificate were available, both indicating the respondent's date of birth as September 8, 2003. 
• Based on proper documentation, respondent No. 2 was 17 years, 3 months, and 10 days old at the time of the incident (February 17, 2021), making him a juvenile delinquent. 
• The JJB had no authority to review its own earlier determination of the respondent's date of birth (September 8, 2003) from a previous case, as the JJ Act, 2015 confers no such power of review. 
• For heinous offenses committed by juveniles aged 16-18 years, the JJB must conduct a preliminary assessment of the juvenile's mental and physical capacity before deciding whether trial should proceed in a Children's Court. 
• The JJB correctly conducted this preliminary assessment and found respondent No. 2 physically and mentally fit to understand the consequences of his actions, ordering the case to be transferred to the Juvenile Court/POCSO Court. 
• The High Court granted bail to respondent No. 2, and since three years have passed without evidence of misuse of liberty, the court found no reason to interfere with the bail order. 
• The court dismissed both appeals but noted that the appellant and the State may seek cancellation of bail if respondent No. 2 misuses his liberty.

What are the Powers and Functions of the Juvenile Justice Board? 

• Following are the powers and functions if the Juvenile Justice Board: 
  • Ensure informed participation of the child and the parent/guardian in every step of the process. (Section 8(3)(a)). 
  • Ensure that the child's rights are protected throughout the process of apprehending the child, enquiry, after care and rehabilitation. (Section 8(3)(b)). 
  • Ensure availability of legal aid for the child through legal service institution. (Section 8(3)(c)). 
  • Wherever necessary, provide an interpreter or translator, having such qualifications, experience, and on payment of such fees as may be prescribed, to the child if he fails to understand the language used in the proceedings. (Section 8(3)(d)). 
  • Direct Probation Officer/Child Welfare Officer/Social Worker to conduct social investigation to ascertain the circumstances in which the alleged offence was committed and to submit report within 15 days from the date of first production of the child before the JJB. (Section 8(3)(e)). 
  • Adjudicate and dispose of cases of children in conflict with law in accordance with the process of inquiry in section 14. (Section 8(3)(f)). 
  • When a Child in Conflict with Law is in need of care and protection, JJB will simultaneously transfer such matters to Child Welfare Committee. (Section 8(3)(g)). 
  • Include an individual care plan for the child's rehabilitation in a final order disposing of the matter. (Section 8(3)(h)). 
  • Conduct enquiry for declaring fit persons regarding case of children in conflict with law. (Section 8(3)(i)). 
  • Conduct at least one monthly inspection of the residential facilities of children in conflict with law and recommend action for improvement in quality of services to the DCPU and the State Government. (Section 8(3)(j)). 
  • Order police to register F.I.R. for offences committed against child in conflict with law on a complaint made in this regard. (Section 8(3)(k)). 
  • Order police to register F.I.R. for offences against child in need of care and protection on a written complaint by a CWC. (Section 8(3)(l)). 
  • Conduct regular inspection of jails meant for adults, to ensure no child is locked in such jails and take immediate measures for transfer of such a child to the observation home. (Section 8(3)(m)). 
  • The JJB shall make an order directing the Police to destroy relevant records of such conviction after the expiry of the period of appeal or a reasonable period. (Section 24(2)).