Naheed Ara Moonis, J. - (1.) THE instant 482 petition is arising out of judgment and order dated 10.10.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffar Nagar in Criminal Misc. Application No. 53 of 2007 (Ram Dayal v. State) whereby the application moved by the opposite party No. 2 under Section 6(2)/7A of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as an 'Act' was allowed declaring the son of the opposite party No. 2 as juvenile. At the time of admission the another Bench by order dated 30.10.2007 while issuing notice to the opposite party No. 2 to file counter affidavit stayed the further proceedings in the aforesaid case. When the notices were served upon opposite party No. 2 the learned Counsel Sri Ram Jee Saxena put in appearance and filed a counter affidavit along with stay vacation application of which no rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the learned Counsel for the applicant despite time granted earlier.
(2.) I have heard Sri A.B.L. Gaur, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant assisted by Sri Saurabh Gaur for the applicant, Sri Ram Jee Saxena, learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 2, the learned A.G.A. and perused the record. A preliminary objection was raised by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 with regard to the maintainability of the instant 482 petition. It is contended by him that the son of the opposite party No. 2 was implicated in a case under Section 376 Indian Penal Code, which was registered as case Crime No. 297 of 2007. At the alleged date of incident dated 1.3.2007 the accused was 14 years of age and claimed to be tried in accordance with the Juvenile Justice Act.
(3.) THE application along with affidavit was moved on his behalf, which was rejected as not maintainable on the ground that no proceeding under the Juvenile Justice Act is pending. The said order was passed on 29.3.2007 by the learned Additional District Judge. No order has been passed on merit deciding the application moved under Section 6(2)/7A of the Act. The bail application on behalf of the son of opposite party No. 2 was pending before the Sessions Judge as Misc. Bail Application No. 890 of 2007. The said application was registered as criminal Misc. Case No. 56 of 2007 and the learned Sessions Judge had rejected that application on the question of maintainability, which is evident from the order itself, which is being reproduced; Case called out. Present Sri Dushyant Singh, Advocate for the applicant. The present application has been moved by the applicant under Section 6(2) of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. The application under Section 2 of Section 6 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 can be moved before the Sessions Judge only when the proceeding comes before the court in appeal, revision or otherwise. No appeal, revision or any other proceeding are pending before this Court regarding accused/applicant and as such the application cannot be entertained by Sessions Judge in view of Section 2 of the Act. The application is devoid of any merit and is liable to be rejected. The application is hereby rejected.;