Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Dinesh Kumar vs The State Of Haryana on 6 August, 2025
Bench: Sudhanshu Dhulia, Aravind Kumar
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 768/2011
MANOJ APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The appellant before this Court after facing trial was
convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of
Rs.10,000/- & Rs.5,000/- along with default stipulations by
the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat for the offences
punishable under Sections 302 & 392 of the Indian Penal Code
which has been upheld by the High Court. During the pendency
of this appeal before this Court, the appellant raised a
plea of juvenility and consequently this Court on 17.01.2024
passed the following order:-
“The present appellant has been convicted under
Section 302 & 392 r/w Section 34 IPC. The conviction
has been upheld by the High Court of Punjab and
Haryana vide order dated 18.9.2009. Being aggrieved by
the said order the appellant preferred Special Leave
Signature Not Verified
Petition and on 11.3.2011 leave was granted in the
Digitally signed by
Nirmala Negi
Date: 2025.08.08
matter.
12:48:41 IST
Reason:
During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant
raised a plea of juvenility for the first time before
this Court by way of an application. On which
2following orders were passed:-
“Heard both sides. After going into all the
materials placed, the period in custody and the
grievance expressed, we are inclined to
consider the claim of the appellants.
Therefore, the appellants are ordered to be
released on bail in connection with Sessions
Case No.134 of 1998 to the satisfaction of the
Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat. The
Additional Sessions Judge, is free to impose
appropriate condition(s) as he deems fit. The
Crl.M.P.s for bail are disposed of.”
Although the aforesaid order was passed by this Court
but the matter was not sent to the Juvenile Justice
Board for an inquiry in the matter.
In the interest of justice, we direct Juvenile Justice
Board, Bhiwani to conduct an inquiry in the matter in
accordance with law. The report and all the relevant
documents be submitted before this Court within a
period of three months from today.
The appellant is directed to be present before the
Juvenile Justice Board, Bhiwani within two weeks from
today.
The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order
to Juvenile Justice Board, Bhiwani for compliance.
List after receipt of the report of the Juvenile
Justice Board, Bhiwani.”
3. In short, therefore the Juvenile Justice Board,
Bhiwani (for short “the JJB, Bhiwani”) was directed to
conduct an inquiry in this matter as to the juvenility of
the appellant and primarily whether he had attained the age
of 18 years on the date of incident i.e. 10.08.1998.
3
Pursuant to our order, an inquiry was conducted by the JJB,
Bhiwani and it has came to the conclusion which is on record
that on perusal of the date of birth certificate which was
issued from the Board of School Education, Haryana (for
short ‘the BSE, Haryana’) his date of birth is mentioned as
15.05.1981 and for this, the JJB, Bhiwani had summoned the
official(s)/officer(s) from the BSE, Haryana who had
verified that the enrollment number of the present appellant
was 751512 which is the same as mentioned in the certificate
and from the record it is clear that his date of birth is
15.05.1981. Consequent to this, since the incident is of
10.08.1998 & at the time of occurrence he was 17 years, 2
months and 25 days, the appellant was a juvenile. For this
reason and on the basis of the report of the JJB, Bhiwani,
the appellant was declared as a juvenile. We agree with the
findings.
4. We have gone through the records and do not see any
interference as to the conviction of the appellant. But
since, the maximum period which a juvenile has to undergo,
has already been undergone by the appellant which is about
10 years as we have been informed at the Bar. Presently, the
appellant has been released on bail by the order of this
Court. He need not surrender. The bail bonds shall stand
discharged.
5. The present appeal shall stand disposed of in the
above terms.
4
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stands
disposed of.
…….……………..J.
[SUDHANSHU DHULIA]
…………………..J.
[ARAVIND KUMAR]
New Delhi;
August 06, 2025.
5
ITEM NO.114 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s). 64/2011
DINESH KUMAR Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF HARYANA Respondent(s)
WITH
Crl.A. No. 768/2011 (II-B)
Date : 06-08-2025 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSHU DHULIA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR
For Appellant(s) Mr. S. Rajappa, AOR
Dr. Puran Chand, Adv.
Ms. G Dhivyasri, Adv.
Mr. R Gowrishankar, Adv.
Ms. Anita Chahal, Adv.
Mrs. Prabhati Nayak, Adv.
Mr. Umakant Misra, Adv.
Mr. Debabrata Dash, Adv.
Ms. Apoorva Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Tushar Garg, Adv.
Mr. Soubhagya Ranjan Pati, Adv.
Mr. Niranjan Sahu, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, A.A.G.
Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR
Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv.
Mr. Aman Dev Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Gaj Singh, Adv.
Ms. Deepika Singh, Adv.
Rovins Fr.Verma, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 64/2011
List on 28.08.2025.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 768/2011
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order, which
is placed on the file.
6
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(NIRMALA NEGI) (RENU BALA GAMBHIR)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR