Lodging juveniles in adult prisons is deprivation of their personal liberty: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday held that lodging juveniles in adult prisons amounted to deprivation of their personal liberty [Vinod Katara vs State of UP]..A bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and JB Pardiwala underscored that personal liberty is one of the oldest concepts to "be purported by national courts.""The notion that is accepted today is that liberty encompasses these rights and privileges which have long been recognized as being essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by a free man and not merely freedom from bodily restraint," the judgment stated. .Pertinently, the bench also observed that one of the reasons for an accused to not raise a claim of juvenility, even at a belated stage, was the legal aid programmes which "are mired in systemic bottlenecks"."The bitter truth is that even the legal aid programmes are mired in systemic bottlenecks and often it is only at a considerably belated stage of the proceeding that the person becomes aware of the rights, including the right to be differently treated on the ground of juvenility.".The top court made these observations while hearing a plea by a murder convict undergoing life imprisonment. The convict contended that he was 14 years old at the time of commission of offence and sought directions to the State of Uttar Pradesh (UP) for verification of his exact age..The conviction of the petitioner was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2016. However, he had not raised the issue of juvenility at the time. The petitioner later underwent an age determination test, as suggested by the state medical board, which too did not confirm his juvenility..Thereafter, the convict discovered a family register wherein his year of birth was recorded as 1968. If 1968 was the correct birth year of the petitioner, then his age at the time of the offence would be 14 years..The top court while hearing the issue observed that once a child is caught in the web of adult criminal justice system, it is difficult for the child to get out of it unscathed. "Awareness about the rights of the child and correlated duties remain low among the functionaries of the juvenile justice system.".The bench also held that a mere opinion by the headmaster in the present case of the petitioner looking one or two years older than the age claimed by him, or the petitioner alleging to be older while being arrested would not hold much water."It is the documentary evidence placed on record that plays a major role in determining the age of a juvenile in conflict of law," the Court said..The two-judge bench, on considering the case at length, directed that the petitioner be subjected to an ossification test or any other latest medical age determination test. Further, it was directed that such test be carried out by a team of three doctors, one of whom is the head of the Radiology Department.The Court also directed Sessions Court, Agra to examine the claim of the petitioner's juvenility within one month..However, highlighting that the family register assumes importance in light of the fact that the ossification test report may not be absolutely helpful in determining the exact age, the Sessions Court was asked to examine the authenticity and genuineness of the family register as well..A report to this effect was sought in one month..[Read Judgment].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.