The Delhi High Court held that the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 clearly bars any appeal against an acquittal issued by a Juvenile Justice Board. It added that victims cannot claim a copy when disclosure risks violating juvenile privacy.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court ruled that the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 explicitly prohibits appeals against acquittal orders made by a Juvenile Justice Board.
Consequently, a victim or their family cannot assert an enforceable right to receive a certified copy of such an order for the purpose of contesting it, especially when disclosure could infringe on a juvenile’s privacy.
Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma made this statement while considering a petition filed by the father of a minor victim of sexual assault, alongside a civil society organization, challenging the legality of the Juvenile Justice Board’s refusal to provide a copy of its acquittal order.
Also Read: Juvenile Conviction No Ground for Job Disqualification Under JJ Act: Allahabad High Court
This case stemmed from an FIR filed under Sections 307 and 376 of the IPC, in which a juvenile was acquitted by JJ Board-II on February 19, 2015.
The Court dismissed the challenge, noting that Section 21 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 imposes a legal ban on revealing any report or order that could identify a juvenile in conflict with the law.
The Court stated,
“The provision is intended to protect the privacy, dignity, and future prospects of the juvenile and has to be strictly construed,”
The Court also referenced Section 52 of the JJ Act, which grants a right of appeal to any person aggrieved by an order from a competent authority under the Act, while explicitly excluding appeals against acquittal orders issued by a Juvenile Justice Board.
Citing a previous ruling from a coordinate bench in X Minor through Father Natural Guardian v. State, the Court reiterated,
“Where no right of appeal exists in law, no corresponding enforceable right to seek a certified copy of the order for the purpose of challenge can be claimed, particularly when such disclosure may also infringe the confidentiality mandate under Section 21 of the JJ Act, 2000.”
Therefore, Justice Sharma concluded that since neither the victim nor her father had a statutory right to contest the juvenile’s acquittal, the Juvenile Justice Board’s decision to deny access to the acquittal order dated February 19, 2015, was justified.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Juvenile