Benefit of Juvenile Justice Act Cannot Be Denied to Child in Conflict With Law

Source: Chhattisgarh High Court 

Why in News? 

The Chhattisgarh High Court held that a person who was below 18 years of age when an alleged offence occurred must be treated as a Child in Conflict With Law (CCL) under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (JJ Act), and that all disqualifications attached to such criminal cases stand removed under Section 24(1) of the Act. 

• The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru delivered the judgment in Prahlad Prasad Rathour v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors., setting aside the petitioner’s termination from government service. 

What was the Background of Prahlad Prasad Rathour v. State of Chhattisgarh Case? 

• The appellant, an ex-serviceman from the Indian Navy with an exemplary service record of 15 years, was appointed as a Food Inspector in 2018 under the quota reserved for ex-servicemen. 
• In 2024, his services were terminated by the State authorities on the basis of a police verification report that mentioned two minor criminal cases registered against him in 2002, when he was still a minor. 
• Both cases were settled in 2007 before the Lok Adalat through compromise, long before he joined State service. The authorities, however, cited “suppression of material facts” in the verification form as the reason for termination. 
• The learned Single Judge dismissed his writ petition on 07.01.2025, upholding the termination. The petitioner then filed a writ appeal before the Division Bench, contending that: 
  • The alleged offences were trivial and occurred when he was a child; 
  • He was acquitted through compromise nearly 11 years before joining service; 
  • His conduct and character during naval service were “Exemplary” and “Very Good”; and 
  • He was entitled to the benefit of Section 24(1) of the JJ Act, 2015, which erases disqualifications attached to such cases. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

The Division Bench found the termination order arbitrary and legally unsustainable. 

It observed that: 

• The criminal cases against the appellant pertained to 2002, when he was below 18 years, and both concluded in 2007. 
• On the date of verification in 2018, there was no subsisting disqualification or pending proceeding. 
• The State’s reliance on stale cases to declare the appellant “unfit” for public service was contrary to law laid down by the Supreme Court in Avtar Singh v. Union of India (2016) and Ravindra Kumar v. State of U.P. (2024), which held that non-disclosure of trivial or long-closed cases does not amount to suppression. 
• The appellant was a Child in Conflict With Law (CCL) at the time of the alleged offences, and under Section 24(1) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, all disqualifications arising from such proceedings stand removed. 
• The termination without giving any opportunity of hearing violated the principles of natural justice under Article 14 of the Constitution. 

The Court also said that the purpose of Section 24(1) is to allow a child to lead a dignified life free from stigma, ensuring rehabilitation and reintegration. 

Who is a Child in Conflict with Law?  

About: 

• The child in conflict with law is a concept based on the Juvenile justice Act defined under Section 2(13) of the JJ Act where it is stated that when a person who has not attained the age of 18 years has committed a crime or alleged to have been committed a crime shall be deemed to be a child in conflict with law.  
• It is generally presumed that a child is born with innocence and due to societal behaviors and psychological disparities they may be deprived of moral and ethical values which lead them to commit offences.  
• When a minor commits such crimes against society, it is said to conflict with the law.  
• It is noticed and observed that with the right kind of care and rehabilitation a child can be transformed into a better human.  

Constitutional Provisions: 

• Article 21: The right to life and personal liberty states that no person can be deprived of living his life with liberty.   
• Article 22(1): The Right to be informed about the arrest and to consult an advocate of a person who has been arrested.  

Provisions Related to Juvenile Justice Act 

• Section 2(13): Any person who has not attained the age of 18 years alleged or found to have committed an offence shall be called a child in conflict with laws.  
• Section 12(1): When a person who has not attained the age of 18 years alleged to have been committed an offence either bailable or non bailable offence shall be granted bail subject to that his bail would not result into any danger to him and proper care should be taken by the juvenile justice board while granting bail.  
• Section 3: This section ensures that a child covered under the purview of this act shall be reunited with his family as soon as possible subject to his best interest.  
• Section 104: This section empowers the Board to review its own decision on an application filled by the aggrieved party pertaining to the proper constitution of members specified in the act.