Search results
Mrs. Shilpa Mittal. Nutritionist and Diet Consultant. Founder of Shilpsnutrilife, have done masters in food science and nutrition and holds a merit rank position. She ia also a certified diabetes educator and an Onco Nutritionist.
- I. Facts of The Case
- II. Issue
- III. Rules Under Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children Act), 2015
- IV. Submissions by Counsels
- V. Court Decision
- VI. Cases Cited
- VII. Analysis in Light of The Above-Cited Cases
- VIII. Comparative Analysis
- IX. Conclusion
- X. Suggestions and Recommendations
An offence punishable under Section 304of IPC,1860 was alleged to be committed by a juvenile (above 16 but below 18), which gives a maximum punishment of up to ten years and a fine with no minimum sentence prescribed. The appeal filed in the Delhi High Court against the decision of the Juvenile Justice Board that held the juvenile to be tried as an...
The scope of ‘Heinous Offences’ under Section 2(33) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 Whether Section 2(33) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 extends to those offences prescribing either no minimum punishment or a minimum punishment of less than 7 years but states clearly the maximum punishment of more than 7 years.
Section 2(33)Section 14Section 15Section 191. Appellant counsel
The counsel for the appellant contended about the legislature’s failure in recognizing the “fourth category” of offences, as raised in the issue, within the ambit of ‘Heinous offences’ as provided under Section 2(33). Thus the council highlighted a wide range of offences falling under this ‘fourth category’ has yet to be specifically recognized under Juvenile Justice Act 2015. The counsel submitted his contention to the court that if the word “minimum” is removed from the definition of ‘heino...
2. Respondent Counsel
The counsel for the respondent contended in response to the Appellant’s submission before the Court by reminding the Court’s limitation to rewrite a law based on the sole ground of an existing lacuna in the Act and that the statute could only be corrected by the Legislature itself. Furthermore, the counsel also submitted that the intention of the Legislature cannot be made out only on the sole reason of leaving out cognizance of a category of offences through this Act in question.
On analysing Section 2(33)read along with Sections 14, 15 and 19 of the Act, the Court reached to the conclusion that the Legislature’s intention behind the Act was to keep the statute in the best interest of the child by constructing a detailed procedure to be followed before trying the child as an adult. Thus the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that o...
Sheela Barse (II) and Ors. v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.– The court referred to this decision to highlight the history and development of Juvenile Justice Act in India wherein through this landm...Salil Bali v. Union of India (UOI) and Anr.–The court referred this case to provide a backdrop of the need felt for the amendment of Juvenile Justice Act 2000 after the agitation rampaged through t...Subramanian Swamy and Ors. v. Raju Thr. Member Juvenile Justice Board and Anr.– The court referred to this decision to highlight how the same court had rejected a petition that challenged the provi...Grey v. Pearson andSalmon v. Duncombe and Ors.– The court referred to these House of Lords judgement as a backing to the court’s rejection to appellant counsel’s submission to remove the word “mini...The purpose of the act of 2015 is to ensure that the children coming in conflict with the law are dealt with separately and not like adults. This call for the need for the trial of a child as an adult roared through society after the unfortunate incident of Nirbhaya’s case. After the court rejecting few petitions challenging the provisions of the J...
In the U.S, juveniles are tried as adults on attaining the age of 14 years except for some states like Vermont, Indiana, South Dakota where a child of even ten years can be tried as an adult. However, narrowing down to heinous crimes, even life imprisonment can be granted to a child aged of twelve years as the maximum punishment. Usually, a child o...
The Court after analysing the contentions made by both the counsels through the various decisions referred had reached the conclusion and decided not to subtract the word “minimum” from the context laid down in Section 2(33) of the Act by rejecting the submission of the Appellant counsel’s to consider the word ‘minimum’ as surplusage. However, the ...
The issue herein is not just about better incorporation of the ‘fourth category’ offences in the JJ Act of 2015 rather it goes the view through this lens. The ambiguity created by the Legislature could be exploited in future similar cases and circumstances. Failure of the legislature to recognise the offences that fall in the mid-way of serious and...
Shilpa Mittal has been helping people Stay Healthy and Prevent Life Style Diseases for… · Experience: Self employed · Location: Mumbai · 500+ connections on LinkedIn. View Shilpa Mittal’s...
- 500+
- 7.1K
- Self employed
- Mumbai Area, India
Jan 9, 2020 · CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 34 OF 2020. (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 7678 of 2019) SHILPA MITTAL …APPELLANT(S) Versus. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. … RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT. Deepak Gupta, J. Leave granted. 2.
Dt. Shilpa Mittal is a Dietitian/Nutritionist in Borivali, Mumbai. Book Appointment, Consult Online, View Doctor Fees, Contact Number, User Reviews and Ratings for Dt. Shilpa Mittal | Lybrate
Nutritionist, a merit ranker. Have done Masters in Food science and Nutrition. Founder of Shilpsnutrilife, i.e Diet and lifestyle makeover of one's self. R...
2,934 Followers, 1,902 Following, 4,369 Posts - Shilpa Mittal Nutritionist (@Shilpsnutrilife) on Instagram: "Helps people fall in love with food. Award winning Nutritionist Helped 10,000+ clients 25+ yrs of experience DM for consultation".
