Where an inquiry has been initiated against a juvenile in conflict with law or a child in need of care and protection and during the course of such inquiry the juvenile or the child ceases to be such, then, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, the inquiry may be continued and orders may be made in respect of such person as if such person had continued to be a juvenile or a child.
Image Source: photoblog.statesman.com
Comment:
The section supports the view expressed by the Supreme Court in the case of Arnit Das v. State of Bihar wherein the Court had expressed a view that if the competent authority or the Court is satisfied that at the beginning of inquiry, the accused was a juvenile, his trial under the Juvenile Justice Act would continue even if crosses the prescribed maximum age during trial proceedings.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The crucial date for determination of the age of the accused to be tried under the Juvenile Justice Act would be date on which he was produced before the competent authority or Court for inquiry or trial.
With reference to Section 2 (h) of the Act, the Apex Court in Gurpreet Singh v. State of Punjab, held that the Court should first consider the legality or otherwise of conviction of the accused. If on the report of the Trial Court the conviction is upheld then the Court should see whether the accused was juvenile on the date of occurrence of the offence.
He should be sent to Juvenile Home if he was juvenile on such date and continues to be so. But if was not juvenile on the date of passing of final order by the Apex Court, he no longer continues to be juvenile, and the sentence imposed against him would not be set aside.