The Delhi High Court in the case Sumaiya Jan @ Soumayya v. State NCT of Delhi observed that the trial court is required to give the view wherein it is stated that on what basis charges have been framed against an accused under the Juvenile Justice Act.
The bench headed by Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma in the case observed and has stated that though at the stage of charge the court is not required to pass detailed order.
The court in the case observed wherein the plea is moved by a woman challenging a trial court order passed on 06.07.2022, while framing the charges against her for the offences as stated under section 307 and section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 75 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
The counsel, Advocate Rakesh Malhotra appearing for the accused submitted before the court that the chargesheet framed was filed under section 325, section 506 and section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 75 of Juvenile Justice Act.
It has also been submitted by him before the court that the impugned order was apparently wrong on the face of it as the trial court had based its opinion which being on the basis of the statement recorded as stated under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 of the mothers of the minor child, whereas no such statement was on the record.
It was also contended before the court that even the FSL report was not filed.
Further, it has been submitted by the prosecution that there was no such statement recorded as stated under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 of the child of the mother.
The court stated that it being the settled provision that merely because hat merely because the accused persons are conceded, the said charges cannot be framed.
The bench headed by Justice Sharma remanded the matter back to the trial court for hearing the argument afresh on the question of framing of charge and the same is to be decided in accordance with law.
