Home   |   About us   |   Contact us   |   Request Callback  


This Page To:

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION V/S SWAPAN ROY, decided on Monday, November 24, 2014.
[ In the Supreme Court of India, SLP(Crl.)No. 5699 of 2014. ] 24/11/2014
Advocate(s) : Mukul Rohatgi, A.G., Tushar Mehta, ASG, Meenakshi Grover, Devanshi Singh, B.V. Balaram Das, AOR. Ratnakar Dash, Sr. , Mangaljit Mukherjee, Debarpita Basu Mukherjee, Biswajit Manna, Sarla Chandra.
Judgment Full Text : Existing LawyerServices Members, kindly login above.

Non Members, Enter your email address:- and , to request this judgment.

Alternatively, you may send a request by email to info@lawyerservices.in for the Full Text of this Judgment (chargeable).

LawyerServices Facebook Page

Judgments that may be related:-

  Anoop Singh & Others Versus State,   12/05/2017.  

  Pratima Behera Versus State of Orissa,   31/01/2017.  

  Natvarlal Amarshibhai Devani Versus State of Gujarat & Another,   18/01/2017.  

  Hassan Ali Versus Central Bureau of Investigation represented by The Standing Counsel, CBI & Another,   10/06/2016.  

  Suresh Thimiri & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra,   06/05/2016.  

  M/s. Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited name changed as M/s. Sun pharmaceuticals Limited represented by Arun Sawhney (for short, ?Sun?) & Others Versus State of Telangana through P.S. Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, represented by its Public Prosecutor & Another,   01/04/2016.  

  Ashok Kumar Aggarwal Versus CBI & Others,   13/01/2016.  

  Central Bureau of Investigation Versus Rathin Dandapat & Others,   21/08/2015.  

  Karthikeya Varma @ Kartik Varma Versus The Union of India, represented by The Secretary To The Ministry of Law & Justice of The Union of India New Delhi & Others,   15/07/2015.  

  Venkata Sarveasam Sastry Tejomurty Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others,   01/05/2015.  

  Bijoy Roy & Another Versus State of West Bengal & Another,   20/02/2015.  

  Swapan Kumar Das & Others Versus Biswajit Maji & Another,   23/12/2014.  

  Mumtaz @ Mumtyaz Versus State of U.P.(Now Uttarkhand),   19/11/2014.  

  L.R. Mithran Versus Central Bureau of Investigation, A.C.B.,   13/06/2014.  

  V. Andi Thevar Versus The Senior Branch Manager,   30/04/2014.  

  Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association & Another Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others,   25/04/2014.  

  Swapan Kumar Saha Versus Biswa Nath Sureka,   28/10/2013.  

  Rudra Jyoti Bhattacharjee & Others Versus Union of India & Another,   19/09/2013.  

  A.V. Thomas Versus State of Kerala, represented by The Public Prosecutor High Court of Kerala & Others,   12/09/2013.  

  Kulbhushan Nahar & Others Versus C.B.I. & Others,   04/09/2013.  

  Pratima Saha Versus The State of Tripura (to be represented by the Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, West Tripura,   03/07/2013.  

  Dr. Asoke Kumar Chaudhuri & Others Versus Dr. Kunal Saha,   01/07/2013.  

  Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav & Others Versus The State of Bihar through the C.B.I.,   17/05/2013.  

  Chandran Ratnaswami & Others Versus K.C. Palanisamy & Others,   09/05/2013.  

  Brijesh Pandey & Others Versus State of Tripura & Another,   21/12/2012.  

  Ritesh Sinha Versus The State of Uttar Pradesh & Another,   07/12/2012.  

  Smt. Meena Mehra & Others Versus The Lokayukt Organisation & Others,   23/09/2011.  

  SK. Yusuf Versus State of West Bengal,   14/06/2011.  

  M.B. Rajanikanth & Another Versus The State Inspector of Police, CBI, ACB, Visakhapatnam & Others,   09/06/2011.  

  Debapriya Pal @ Debu @ Timpu & Another Versus State of West Bengal,   11/04/2011.  

  Mohammed Rafique @ Rafik Shaikh Versus State of West Bengal,   01/03/2011.  

  S. Kasimayan Versus The Inspector of Police, CBI-ACB,   18/11/2010.  

  Shri Subhkaran Luharuka & Another Versus State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & Another,   09/07/2010.  

  Central Bureau Of Investigation Versus Swapan Kumar Bose,   14/06/2010.  

  Maran Nama Versus State Of Tripura,   08/01/2010.  

  Niskamananda Maharaj @ Murari Mohan Karmakar Versus State of West Bengal,   29/01/2009.  

  Kishwar Jahan Versus State of West Bengal,   14/08/2008.  

  Salim Akthar Versus State of West Bengal,   16/05/2008.  

  Sunita Jain Versus State of West Bengal,   13/05/2008.  

  Paresh Chandra Kar Versus State,   31/03/2008.  

  Central Bureau of Investigation Versus K.M. Sharan ,   21/02/2008.  

  Kishor Kirtilal Mehta & Others Versus State of Maharashtra & Others,   01/02/2008.  

  R.V. Palega & Another Versus State & Another ,   16/01/2008.  

  Amal Kumar Majumdar Versus The State ,   15/01/2008.  

  State Of West Bengal Versus Jawahar Singh,   05/12/2007.  

  Association For Protection of Democratic Rights & Others Versus State of West Bengal,   16/11/2007.  

  Harshad Himmatlal Rupani Versus State of West Bengal,   12/10/2007.  

  Airports Authority of India Versus Pradip Kumar Banerjee,   06/08/2007.  

  Chandra Bhushan Upadhyay & Others Versus The state, through Inspector of Police, PS Malakajigiri, District Ranga Reddy ,   28/03/2007.  

  Clough Engineering Limited, Australia Versus The State of A.P., through Superintendent of Police ,   12/03/2007.  

#LawyerServices #bestlegalsoftware #legalsoftware #judgment #caselaw

  "2014 (13) Scale 137"  ==   "2014 (15) SCC 659"  ==   "2015 (6) RCR(Criminal) 150"  ==   ""  

    1. This Court on 27th October 2014 had passed the following order:Mr. Rohatgi learned Attorney General apart from submitting that the finding recorded on that score is absolutely unsustainable also submitted that the entire scheme of juvenility is engaging the attention of the Central Government. While dealing with the issue two suggestions were given to the learned Attorney General namely whether there is any kind of consideration as regards the reduction of age and whether the juvenility will depend upon the nature of offence committed. To elaborate whether the attention of the Government will be drawn to the prevailing atmosphere that most of the juveniles are engaged in horrendous and heinous crimes like rape murder and drug-peddling etc.2. It is submitted by Mr. Mukul Rohatgi learned Attorney General appearing for Union of India along with Mr. Tushar Mehta learned Additional Solicitor General that the concern expressed by this Court is still engaging the attention of the competent authority of the State. It is further submitted by Mr. Rohatgi that he realizes the concern of the 'Nation' at the rate the heinous crimes are committed by the juveniles who are called juvenile under the present Act the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000. Elaborating the concern the learned Attorney General would state that in the instant case the respondent who claims to be a juvenile has been alleged accused of offence wherein a gathering in a village was attacked by lethal weapons by other accused persons along with the respondent which has resulted in the death of nine persons and injuries have been suffered by several other persons.3. Mr. Rohatgi and Mr. Mehta would submit that the High Court has found him to be a juvenile as he was seventeen years and six months on the date of alleged occurrence though they seriously would contend that it is factually incorrect. That is the controversy to be gone into.4. Mr. Rohatgi and Mr. Mehta would further propone that this kind of involvement of the juveniles under the present Act are increasing and it has actually become a matter of grave concern. We are inclined to think that the concern expressed by learned Attorney General is absolutely correct and we are of the convinced opinion that he will put it across to the competent authorities so that care is taken to the extent that the nature of the offence has some nexus with the age in question for the cry of the collected is to live in a peaceful society that respects life dignity and others liberty.5. Let this matter be listed in the second week of January 2015 for further hearing.