You are on page 1of 27





1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................... 3 2. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 5 3. MINORITY.......................................................................................................................... 7

I. II. III. IV. V. VI.

Age of majority ............................................................................................................... 7 Juvenile justice and claim of juvenility ....................................................................... 8 Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility (MACR) .................................................. 9 Age verification of rescued victims of trafficking .................................................... 10 Age of consent for sexual intercourse ....................................................................... 10 Child witnesses.......................................................................................................... 11

4. CIVIL PROCEEDING....................................................................................................... 13 5. CRIMINAL PROCEEDING ............................................................................................. 16

I. II.

criminal responsibility .................................................................................................. 16 procedure under juvenile legislation ......................................................................... 17

6. LEGAL DISABILITY OF MINOR UNDER LIMITATION ACT, 1963 ........................ 19


Section 6 - Legal disability ........................................................................................... 20 Section 7- Disability of one of several persons ......................................................... 20 Section 8 - Special exceptions................................................................................... 21

7. APPLICATION FOR BAIL UNDER JUVENILE JUSTICE ACT, 2000 ........................ 22

Affidavit ............................................................................................................................... 24
8. CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 25

9. BIBIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................ 27



I am feeling highly elated to work on the topic MINORITY Vs LEGAL DISABILITY IN DIFFERENT PROCEEDING under the guidance of my DPC teacher. I am very grateful to him for his exemplary guidance. I would like to enlighten my readers regarding this topic and I hope I have tried my best to pave the way for bringing more luminosity to this topic. I also want to thank all of my friends, without whose cooperation this project was not possible. Apart from all these, I want to give special thanks to the librarian of my university who made every relevant materials regarding to my topic available to me at the time of my busy research work and gave me assistance. And at last I am very much obliged to the God who provided me the potential for the rigorous research work.

At finally yet importantly I would like to thank my parents for the financial support.

-----------------Thanking you



The project is basically based on the doctrinal method of research as no field work is done on this topic. The whole project is made with the use of secondary source.

AIMS & OBJECTIVES: The aim of the project is to present a detailed study of MINORITY Vs LEGAL DISABILITY IN DIFFERENT PROCEEDING through decisions and suggestions and different writings, articles & reports.

SOURCES OF DATA: The following secondary sources of data have been used in the project1. Articles 2. Books 3. Websites METHOD OF WRITING: The method of writing followed in the course of this research paper is primarily analytical.

MODE OF CITATION: The researcher has followed a uniform mode of citation throughout the course of this research paper


Who is a child? When does childhood cease or begin? These simple questions have complex answers. Most of the old worlds civilisations did not consider children human beings with full human value. Thus, childhood was not an independent social category until the beginning of the 18th century. Legislation did not deal with childhood as a period of life that needs special measures of protection until the early-19th century. In his book, Lenfant ET la vie familiale sous lAncien Regime, Philippe Aries said that the child in the Middle Ages did not exist as an independent anthropological category and therefore children did not need to be taken into consideration. The law, policy and practice of child welfare have undergone significant changes from an historical perspective. Before 1839, authority and control was important. It was an established common law doctrine that the father had absolute rights over his children. After this, the welfare principle was reflected in the dominant ideology of the family. Victorian judges, who developed the welfare principle, favoured one dominant family form. The traditional Indian view of welfare is based on daya, dana, dakshina, bhiksha, ahimsa, samya-bhava, swadharma and tyaga, the essence of which were self-discipline, self-sacrifice and consideration for others. It was believed that the wellbeing of children depended on these values. Children were recipients of welfare measures. It was only during the 20th century that the concept of childrens rights emerged. This shift in focus from the welfare to the rights approach is significant. Rights are entitlements. They also imply obligations and goals. The rights approach is primarily concerned with issues of social justice, non-discrimination, equity and empowerment. The rights perspective is embodied in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989, which is a landmark in international human rights legislation. India ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child in December 1992. According to Article 1 of the CRC, a child means every human being below the age of 18 years unless, under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier. The Article thus grants


individual countries the discretion to determine by law whether childhood ceases at 12, 14, 16 or whatever age is found appropriate. Today, nearly all cultures share the view that the younger the child the more vulnerable she/he is physically and psychologically and the less able to fend for herself/himself. Age limits are a formal reflection of societys judgement about the evolution of childrens capacities and responsibilities. Almost everywhere, age limits formally regulate childrens activities: when they can leave school; when they can marry; when they can vote; when they can be treated as adults by the criminal justice system; when they can join the armed forces; and when they can work. But age limits differ from activity to activity, and from country to country.


Several provisions in the Constitution of India impose on the State the primary responsibility of ensuring that all the needs of children are met and that their basic human rights are fully protected. Article 21 A of the Constitution of India says that the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children within the ages of 6 and 14 in such manner as the State may by law determine. Article 45 of the Constitution specifies that the State shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of 6. Article 51 (k) lays down a duty that parents or guardians provide opportunities for education to their child/ward between the age of 6 and 14 years. The age at which a person ceases to be a child varies under different laws in India. Under the Child Labour Prohibition and Regulation Act, 1986, a child is a person who has not completed 14 years of age. The Constitution of India protects children below the age of 14 from working in factories and hazardous jobs. But below 14, they can work in non-hazardous industries. An area of concern is that no minimum age for child labour has been specified. But for the purposes of criminal responsibility, the age limit is 7 and 12 under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. For purposes of protection against kidnapping, abduction and related offences, its 16 years for boys and 18 for girls. For special treatment under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000, the age is 18 for both boys and girls. And the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 defines a child as any person below the age of 18, and includes an adopted step- or foster child. Some provisions relating to age under different laws are: I. AGE OF MAJORITY

Under the Age of Majority Act 1875, every person domiciled in India shall attain the age of majority on completion of 18 years and not before. The Indian Majority Act was enacted in order to bring uniformity in the applicability of laws to persons of different religions. Unless a particular personal law specifies otherwise, every person domiciled in India is deemed to have attained majority upon completion of 18 years of age. However, in the case of a minor for whose person or property, or both, a guardian has been appointed or declared by any court of justice


before the age of 18 years, and in case of every minor the superintendence of whose property has been assumed by the Court of Wards, age of majority will be 21 years and not 18. The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (HMGA), 1956, in Section 4 (a), defines a minor as a person who has not completed the age of 18 years. The age of majority for the purposes of appointment of guardians of person and property of minors, according to the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, is also completion of 18 years. Christians and Parsis also reach majority at 18. Significantly, under the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929, which is a secular law, the age of marriage is 21 years for males and 18 years for females. But the age of marriage in Muslim personal law is the age of puberty (around 14 years). It was held that Muslims are not exempted from this law. If the marriage of a Muslim girl is performed while she is a minor, the marriage cannot be void, but the persons who participated in the marriage are not immune from the legal punishment provided under Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Child Marriage Restraint Act. A Muslim girl can marry on attaining the age of puberty, and her marriage cannot be declared void because she is below the age of 18, according to the Child Marriage Restraint Act. II. JUVENILE JUSTICE AND CLAIM OF JUVENILITY

The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 is a legislation that conforms to the United Nations Minimum Standards for Administration of Justice to Children. It is an Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to juveniles in conflict with the law and children in need of care and protection, by providing for proper care, protection and treatment by catering to their development needs, and by adopting a child-friendly approach in the adjudication and disposition of matters in the best interest of children and for their ultimate rehabilitation through various institutions established under this enactment. Under the 2000 Act, juvenile means a boy or a girl who has not attained the age of 18 years. Under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2005, the following amendments were introduced and applicable to all cases involving detention, prosecution or sentence on imprisonment of juveniles under any such law:


Juvenile in conflict with law means a juvenile who is alleged to have committed an offence and has not completed his 18th year as on the date of the offence being committed.

Whenever a claim of juvenility is raised before any court, or a court is of the opinion that the accused person produced before it was a juvenile on the day the offence was committed, the court shall make an inquiry, take such evidence as may be necessary (but not an affidavit) so as to determine the age of the person, and shall record a finding as to whether or not the person is a juvenile or a child, stating his age as nearly as may be.

An important provision is that a claim of juvenility may be raised before any court and it shall be recognised at any stage even after disposal of the case in terms of the provisions. If the court finds a person to be a juvenile on the day the offence was committed, it shall forward the juvenile to the Board.

It has been observed that, in many instances, if the police that takes a child into custody finds the child well-built he is considered an adult and denied the beneficial provisions of the juvenile justice system. III. MINIMUM AGE OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY (MACR)

The legal definition of a child will also affect how the courts deal with offenders, so age is very significant here. A person who is a minor or a child cannot be convicted in the same manner as an adult. For instance, if a juvenile is accused of an offence under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, he is entitled to necessary benefits under the special enactment of the Juvenile Justice Act. If there is legislation dealing with the criminal liability of minors, the accused should not be tried under the ordinary law for adults. Children have to be dealt with under the juvenile justice system and not the adult criminal justice system. Children can never be imprisoned or given the death sentence.




The age of a rescued victim is an important factor in law enforcement and justice delivery. Anyone under 18 years is a child under the Juvenile Justice Act 2000 and cannot be sent to jail. He has to be looked after in a home and treated according to the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act. There are several anomalies relating to the issue of age verification of trafficked minor girls after rescue. The Indian Penal Code, 1860, states that sexual intercourse with a girl-child under 16 years of age, even with her consent, constitutes an offence of rape under Section 375 of the IPC. Under Section 366 (A), procurement of a minor girl below 18 years of age is an offence. Under Section 366 (B), importation of girls less than 21 years of age from the state of Jammu and Kashmir to any other state, or from a foreign country to anywhere in India, is an offence. Under Section 372 and 373 of the IPC, selling/buying of minor girls below 18 years of age for purposes of prostitution, etc, is an offence. It has been found, however, that traffickers, brothel owners, etc, make sure that the age of the rescued minor is entered as 18 years or above, making her an adult in the records. So, when they are sent to jail, the traffickers/brothel owners bail them out and the victims are returned to their effective confinement. There is a need to ensure the accountability of doctors who carry out age verification. Also of police officers who record the age immediately after a rescue. Age verification reports usually place the victims within an age bracket. There are countless police records where the age of the girl is recorded as appears to be of 18-19 years of age. Even medical examinations place the age within a bracket. The Supreme Court has held that when the experts opinion is given in an age bracket, the lower age in the bracket should be the one taken into consideration, so that the benefit of the doubt favours the victim. Therefore, if the age verification report says that the girl is in the age bracket 17-19 years, for the purposes of law enforcement the age has to be taken as 17 years. V. AGE OF CONSENT FOR SEXUAL INTERCOURSE

In India, the law considers anyone less than 18 years to be a child/minor, not competent to take major decisions affecting herself or others for the purposes of the Indian Majority Act, Contract



Act, Juvenile Justice Act, Child Marriage Restraint Act, or Representation of Peoples Act. However, under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, the girl (aged 16-18) is given the right of consent to sexual intercourse. Yet, she cannot marry at that age even with the consent of her parents. She cannot be taken out of the keeping of her lawful guardian, even with her consent, for lesser purposes. But she can consent to sexual intercourse so long as she does not go out of the keeping of her lawful guardian. The Law Commission of India did attempt, in its 84th report, to bring the age of consent in rape to 18 years, in tune with other enactments and consistent with refined and modern notions regarding the concern and compassion that society should bestow on its younger members. But this was not accepted. As a result, the age of consent in an offence of rape continues to be 16 years even today. Raising the age of consent for sexual intercourse to 18, consistent with the stipulations in subsequent enactments, appears to be the unavoidable imperative before the system. VI. CHILD WITNESSES

The courts have held that evidence from a child witness, if found competent to depose facts, could be the basis for a conviction. In other words, even in the absence of an oath, the evidence of a child witness can be considered under Section 118 of the Evidence Act, provided such a witness is able to understand the answers thereof. The evidence of a child witness and credibility would depend on the circumstances of each case. The only precaution the court should bear in mind whilst assessing the evidence of a child witness is that the witness must be reliable, his/her demeanour must be like that of any other competent witness, and that there is no likelihood of him/her being tutored. Further, Section 118 of the Evidence Act envisages that all persons shall be competent to testify, unless the court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational answers to the questions, because of their young age, extreme old age, or disease -- whether of mind or any other similar cause. However, a young child can be allowed to testify if he/she has the intellectual capacity to understand questions and provide rational answers. While the law recognises the child as a competent witness, a child who is around 6 years old, who is unable to form a proper opinion about the nature of the incident because of immaturity of



understanding, is not considered by the court as a witness whose sole testimony can be relied on without other corroborative evidence. The evidence of a child must be evaluated carefully because he/she is easy prey to tutoring. The word child has therefore been used in law as a term denoting relationship; as a term indicating capacity; and as a term of special protection. Underlying these alternative specifications are very different concepts about the child. These include considering a child a burden, which invokes the right to maintenance and support; regarding children as individuals with temporary disabilities, making for rights to special treatment and special discrimination; treating children as specially vulnerable, to ensure rights to protection; and recognising children as resources for the countrys development, necessitating nurturing and advancement. Thus there do not appear to be any criteria or scientific parameters for determining a child: the age limit in some laws appear arbitrary or based on socio-cultural perceptions. The Indian Mines Act defines children as those below 18 years, and the various state Shops and Establishment Acts define the age as between 12-15 years. It is necessary that the definition of child be brought in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child -- viz all those below 18 years of age. If the best interest of the child is the guiding norm, one can err on the side of a higher age limit for protective care and a lower age limit with respect to civil and cultural matters. A review of the definition of child, in light of Article 1 of the CRC, has been referred to the Law Commission of India as part of a comprehensive review of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Indian Evidence Act and the Indian Penal Code.



Order XXXII, of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with suit by or against minor. This order is concerned with procedure. It does not confer on minor the right to claim through a guardian what they are entitled to under the substantive law. Order XXXII, rule 1, code of Civil Procedure provides that every suit by minor shall be instituted in his name by his next friend. Minor in his context means a person who has not attained his majority within the meaning of section 3 of the Indian Majority Act, 1875. Father can be appointed as guardian/next friend in accordance with the provisions under order XXXII, rule 1 and 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Maintainability of petition for eviction from the property belonging to lunatic cannot be challenged for non-compliance of the Mental Health Act, 1987. Provision of section 50 of the Mental Health Act do not contemplate appointment of guardian in eviction proceeding.1 Order XXXII, rule 2, Code of Civil Procedure provides that where a suit is instituted without next friend of minor, the plaint may be order to be taken off the file on an application by the defendant. Where a suit is instituted by next friend of a minor on his behalf, the court may at any stage of the suit order for security to be furnished by the next friend in view of the provisions of order XXXII, rule 2A. Order XXXII, rule 3, Code of Civil Procedure provides that where the defendant is a minor, the court on being satisfied of the fact of his minority, shall appoint a guardian for such minor. An order for the appointment of guardian for the suit may be obtained upon application in the name and on behalf of the minor or by the plaintiff on the basis of an application supported by an affidavit verifying the fact; notice of such application shall be served on the proposed guardian for the suit for minor. The court may also issue notice to the minor as well. Sale of minors property by natural guardian after guardian ad liten was discharged is not valid if the minor on attaining majority does not challenge it.2 Where a decree against a minor is passed due to gross negligence on the part of his next friend, the minor can file a suit to set aside the decree.3 But,

1 2



Raj Kumat v. Rameshchand, AIR 1999 SC 3511 Divya Dip Singh v Ram Bachan Mishra, AIR 1997 SC !465 3 Asharfi Lal v Koili, AIR 1995 SC 1440

order XXXII, rule 3A, code of Civil Procedure provide that decree against minor shall not be set aside unless prejudice has been caused to his interest. Order XXXII, rule 4 code of Civil Procedure deals with competence of a person to act as next friend or to be appointed guardian of a minor for the suit. But no person shall be appointed guardian of a minor without his consent in writing. Order XXXII, Rule 5 provides for representation of minor by his next friend or guardian for the suit. Order XXXII, Rule 6 provides that a next friend or guardian for the suit shall not without the leave of the court teceive any money or other property on behalf of a minor under the decree for the minor. Under Order XXXII, rule 7, an agreement or compromise by next friend or guardian of minor for the suit as prohibited without the leave of court. Order XXXII, Rule 8 deals with the retirement of next friend. A next friend or guardian of a minor cannot retire without first procuring a fit person for substituting him and giving security for the cost already incurred by him. Order XXXII, Rule 9 deals with the removal of next friend. The Court may remove a next friend or guardian of a minor, if it is satisfied that i. ii. His interest is adverse to that of the minor or He is so connected with the opposite party that it is unlikely that the interest of the minor will be properly protected by him or iii. iv. v. He does not discharge his duty or He ceases to stay in India during the pendency of the suit or There is any other sufficiently justifiable cause.

Order XXXII, Rule 12-14 provides provision related to situation when minor attain majority. It says a minor plaintiff may adopt any of the following courses: i. He may proceed with the suit. In that case he shall apply for an order discharging the next friend or guardian and for leave to proceed in his own name. (rule 12 (1-3)) ii. He may abandon the suit and apply for its dismissal on repayment of cost to the defendant or to his guardian or next friend. (rule 12(4))




He may apply for dismissal of the suit on the ground that it was unreasonable or improper. (rule 14)


Where he is a co-plaintiff, he may repudiate the suit and may apply to have his name struck off as co-plaintiff. If the court finds that he is not a necessary party, it may dismiss him form the suit. But if he is necessary party, the court may make him a defendant.( rule 13)



A separate adjudicating and treatment mechanism has been established for persons below 18 years of age who have committed an offence. They are not to be treated in the same manner as are treated adult offenders. The reason for this being that a young person is believed to be less blameworthy than an adult, as he is prone to act in haste due to lack of judgment, easily influenced by others. ...from their inception, youth justice systems have proceeded from the assumption that children and young people, by dint of their relative immaturity, are less able to control their impulses, less able to understand the seriousness of their offences and less able to foresee the consequences of their actions. Linked to this is the belief that the culpability of many young offenders may be further mitigated by the poverty, cruelty or neglect they have suffered.4 Furthermore, the punishment meted out to adults is perceived to be too harsh to be borne by a young person. I. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

The domestic laws of all countries have laid down a minimum age below which a person is exempt from prosecution and punishment. The rationale for such exemption is the absence of mens rea, i.e., not to criminalise the acts of those who at the time of commission of the crime did not know the right from the wrong. Persons below that age do not realize nor intend the consequences of their acts. Article 40(3)(a) of CRC requires State Parties to promote the establishment of a minimum age below which children shall be presumed not to have the capacity to infringe the penal law. The age of criminal responsibility in India is fixed at 7 years by IPC. Section 82 IPC: Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age. Hence, under Indian law a child below 7 years of age cannot be prosecuted and will not enter the juvenile justice system as a juvenile in conflict with law. If such child falls within the definition of child in need of care and protection5 , he could be produced before the Child Welfare Committee for his care, protection and rehabilitation. Most European countries have



Youth justice in England and Wales, John Pitts, contained in The New Politics of Crime and Punishment, edited by Roger Matthews & Jock Young, Willan Publishing, pg.71 5 Section 2(d) of JJA 2000

fixed the age of criminal responsibility between 13 to 15 years; France, Poland, Germany, Italy and Finland have fixed it at 13, 13, 14, 14, and 15 years, respectively. Seven years is a very low age of criminal responsibility, and requires to be raised. The law has recognized that a person between the age of 7 and 18 years is less culpable than an adult, and has set-out different levels of criminal responsibility depending upon the childs maturity and age. Section 83 IPC : Nothing is an offence which is done by a child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge of the nature and consequences of his conduct on that occasion. The accused child to avail of this defence will have to prove that he is below 12 years of age and that he has not attained adequate maturity of understanding therefore he did not know that what he was doing was wrong. Under the Indian law children between 7 to 12 years of age having sufficient maturity and between 12 to 18 years who have committed an offence are responsible for their criminal acts, but are not to be treated or sentenced in the same manner as an adult. Such children will be dealt with under juvenile legislation, and the focus will be on reforming and rehabilitating them. II. PROCEDURE UNDER JUVENILE LEGISLATION

The procedure prescribed under JJA 2000 will govern cases concerning juveniles in conflict with law irrespective of the offences they have committed. Juvenile offenders are not to be treated in the same manner as adult accused. Juveniles are to be treated differently as they are less culpable and less capable of looking after themselves6. Juvenile legislation lays down a distinct custodial, adjudicatory and sentencing mechanism. The severity of the offence is of no consequence, nor that the offence is covered under a special law7 or local law8. The Supreme Court and different High Courts have held that juvenile legislation shall reign supreme in

6 7



Relevant date for applying the Juvenile Justice Act, Dr. Ved Kumari, (2000) 6 SCC (Jour) 9 Special law is a statute relating to a particular subject, and creates offences that are not covered under IPC. For example, the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act 1956, the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act 1985, the Arms Act 1959 8 Local law is a statute that is applicable within a specific region. For example, the Bombay Police Act 1951, the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act 1999

juvenile cases no matter the nature of offence committed9. To avoid any doubts in this respect, JJA 2000 unequivocally states : Section 1(4): Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force the provisions of this Act shall apply to all cases involving detention, prosecution, penalty or sentence of imprisonment of juveniles in conflict with law under such other law. Hence, whatever crime the juvenile is alleged to have committed, on ascertaining that he is a juvenile his case should be brought before Juvenile Justice Board and his custody be with the Observation Home. Thereafter the course taken should be that as set-out under juvenile legislation.

Raj Singh vs. State of Haryana : (2000) 6 SSC 759; 2000 SCC (Cri) 1270.




Statutes of limitations are designed to aid defendants. A plaintiff, however, can prevent the dismissal of his action for untimeliness by seeking to toll the statute. When the statute is tolled, the running of the time period is suspended until some event specified by law takes place. Tolling provisions benefit a plaintiff by extending the time period in which he is permitted to bring suit. Various events or circumstances will toll a statute of limitations. It is tolled when one of the parties is under a legal disabilitythe lack of legal capacity to do an actat the time the cause of action accrues. A child or a person with a mental illness is regarded as being incapable of initiating a legal action on her own behalf. Therefore, the time limit will be tolled until some fixed time after the disability has been removed. For example, once a child reaches the age of majority, the counting of time will be resumed. A personal disability that postpones the operation of the statute against an individual may be asserted only by that individual. If a party is under more than one disability, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until all the disabilities are removed. Once the statute begins to run, it will not be suspended by the subsequent disability of any of the parties unless specified by statute. Mere ignorance of the existence of a cause of action generally does not toll the statute of limitations, particularly when the facts could have been learned by inquiry or diligence. In cases where a cause of action has been fraudulently concealed, the statute of limitations is tolled until the action is, or could have been, discovered through the exercise of due diligence. Ordinarily, silence or failure to disclose the existence of a cause of action does not toll the statute. The absence of the plaintiff or defendant from the jurisdiction does not suspend the running of the statute of limitations, unless the statute so provides. The statute of limitations for a debt or obligation may be tolled by either an unconditional promise to pay the debt or an acknowledgement of the debt. The time limitation on bringing a lawsuit to enforce payment of the debt is suspended until the time for payment established under the promise or Acknowledgment has arrived. Upon that due date, the period of limitations will start again.





(1) Where a person entitled to institute a suit or make an application for the execution of a decree is, at the time from which the prescribed period is to be reckoned, a minor or insane, or an idiot, he may institute the suit or make the application within the same period after the disability has ceased, as would otherwise have been allowed from the time specified therefor in the third column of the Schedule. (2) Where such person is, at the time from which the prescribed period is to be reckoned, affected by two such disabilities, or where, before his disability has ceased, he is affected by another disability, he may institute the suit or make the application within the same period after both disabilities have ceased, as would otherwise have been allowed from the time so specified. (3) Where the disability continues up to the death of that person, his legal representative may institute the suit or make the application within the same period after the death, as would otherwise have been allowed from the time so specified. (4) Where the legal representative referred to in sub-section (3) is, at the date of the death of the person whom he represents, affected by any such disability, the rules contained in sub-sections (1) and (2) shall apply. (5) Where a person under disability dies after the disability ceases but within the period allowed to him under this section, his legal representative may institute the suit or make the application within the same period after the death, as would otherwise have been available to that person had he not died. Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, 'minor' includes a child in the womb. II. SECTION 7- DISABILITY OF ONE OF SEVERAL PERSONS

Section 7 supplements Section 6 and explains about the disability of one of several persons and its effects. Where one of several person jointly entitled to institute a suit or make an application for the execution of a decree is under any such disability, and a discharge can be given without the concurrence of such person, time will run against them all; where no such discharge can be



given, time will not run as against any of them until one of them becomes capable of giving such discharge without the concurrence of the others or until the disability has ceased. Explanation I.--This section applies to a discharge from every kind of liability, including a liability in respect of any immovable property. Explanation II.--For the purposes of this section, the Manager of a Hindu undivided family governed by the Mitakshara law shall be deemed to be capable of giving a discharge without the concurrence of the other members of the family only if he is in management of the joint family property. III. SECTION 8 - SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS

Section 8 says that suits for pre-emption are not governed by Section 6 and 7 of the act and inspite of the disability, they must be proceeded with and no extension of time will be given of the disability of the Plaintiff. Nothing in section 6 or in section 7 applies to suits to enforce rights of pre-emption, or shall be deemed to extend, for more than three years from the cessation of the disability or the death of the person affected thereby, the period of limitation for any suit or application.




IN THE HONBLE COURT OF SESSION, AT PATNA Appeallate Criminal Jurisdiction In Criminal Appeal No. 223 of 2012 In the matter of application under section 52 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 AND In the matter of : Ram, gender-male, age- 12yrs, resident of Patna, son of Shyam Kumar, gender male, are- 30 being minor represented through his father ..JUVENILE /APPELLANT VERSUS State of Bihar...RESPONDENT

Aggrieved by the Order 223/2012 dated 2303-2012 passed by the Honble Juvenile Justice Board, Patna whereby application for bail on behalf of the applicant has been dismissed.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: That the appellant named above was arrested by the police in the case FIR No. 223/2012 dated 23-09-2011 under section 378 IPC and was produced before the learned Judges of



Juvenile Justice Board, Patna on which they were remanded to judicial custody. The

application and he was remanded to judicial custody. On dated 01-01-2012, the father of the appellants moved an application before 1st Class Magistrate, Patna for holding an enquiry regarding the age of the accused /Juvenile. After taking evidence regarding the age of the appellant the Honble court of 1st Class Magistrate, Patna hold the accused as juvenile on dated 05-04-2012 and the case file was transferred to the court of Juvenile Justice Board, Patna on the same day. On the same day the appellant moved an application for bail through his father before the Juvenile Justice Board, Patna and the same was dismissed by 223/2012 vide order dated 23-04-2012 and aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is being filed on the following amongst other grounds: GROUNDS IN APPEAL 1. That the FIR in this case was registered on the basis of a statement made by informant father of the prosecutrix on the ground that I am resident of Patna stating that I am poor and I am having 5 children. 2. That the allegations as levelled are totally false, concocted and fabricated. No such act has been committed by the applicant and he has been implicated on mere suspicious. 3. That the applicant is the Juvenile and the date of birth of the applicant is 23-04-2000 as per the School records and Board of School education (C.B.S.E) records. 4. That the appellant is entitled to be released on bail and he being the minor cannot be kept in custody. 5. That the present appeal is being filed before this Honble court without any delay and this Honble court is fully empowered under section 52 of the juvenile justice Act, 2000 to entertain and adjudicate upon the present appeal. PRAYER It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that in view of the submissions made and in the interest of justice, this Honble court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 23-032012 passed by the learned lower court and the appellant be released on bail forthwith till the final decision of the case.



Dated: 23-04-2012

AFFIDAVIT Ram Kumar, son of Shyam Kumar, resident of Patna, being minor represented through his father Shyam Kumar

Through counsel _____ Advocate, ___

Dated 23-04-2012



From the above discussion, it is found that a minor in India have different specific legal status. It is firmly believe under Indian law that children and young people are less able to control their impulses, less able to understand the seriousness of their acts and less able to foresee the consequences of their actions. There are many instances where a minor acquire rights, liberty, power and immunity. The Constitution of India guarantees all children certain rights, which have been specially included for them. These include: Right to free and compulsory elementary education for all children in the 6-14 year age group (Article 21 A). Right to be protected from any hazardous employment till the age of 14 years (Article 24). Right to be protected from being abused and forced by economic necessity to enter occupations unsuited to their age or strength (Article 39(e)). Right to equal opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and guaranteed protection of childhood and youth against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment (Article 39 (f)) Under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a minor is disqualified from representing a suit in civil procedure. Order 32 has been specially enacted to protect the interest of minors in civil suit. Every suit by a minor should be instituted in his name by his guardian or next friend. Where a suit is instituted against the minor, the court should appoint a guardian ad litem to defend the suit. Under criminal procedure for minor, the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000 was enacted. It is a separate adjudicating and treatment mechanism established for persons below 18 years of age who have committed an offence. The procedure prescribed under JJA 2000 will govern cases concerning juveniles in conflict with law irrespective of the offences they have committed.



Section 6 and 8 of limitation act, 1963, provides that limitation period that is 3 years starts from the date of attainment of majority where the ordinary period of limitation of limitation expires before cessation of liability i.e. before the date of majority. In the modern age scenario, where minors are 'minors' only because of their age and not their 'level of understanding', its high time the Law Commission of India makes these laws a little more stringent, at least towards minors who fraudulently enter into contracts. Currently, even if a minor 'falsely represents' himself to be a major and enters into a contract, there is no relief available to the other contracting party. Which does not suffice the 'aim' of creating laws, that is to provide the people with justice. The 'law of estoppel' does not apply to a minor. This means that like in the above statement, if a minor represents himself to be a major, he is ALLOWED to later state that he is not, and then get away with it. The contract is just declared by the Court as 'void ab intio'. Numerous amendments have been made till date for the betterment of the existing laws and various sections of the law repealed to make them more just and unbiased, but unfortunately there still are many lacunas in the law which the minors take undue advantage of and the majors are the ones who have to bear the brunt, without any fault of theirs.



BOOK REFFERED: Gupta, Shriniwas, The Limitation Act, Universal Law Publishing Mitra, B.B. and Mallick, M.R., The Limitation Act, Eastern Law House, 21 Ed 2005 Thakker, Justice C.K., Civil Procedure, Eastern Book Company, 5 Ed Rp 2007 Gupta, Vinay Kumar, Mulla Code Of Civil Procedure (Abridged), Lexisnexis Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur, 14th Edition, 2005 (Reprint 2011)

ARTICLE REFFERED: Adenwalla, Ms. Maharukh, CHILD PROTECTION AND JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM for Juvenile in Conflict with Law, CHILDLINE India Foundation, December 2006

ONLINE REFERENCE: <assessed on dated 20-04-2012> <assessed on dated 20-04-2012> <assessed on dated 20-04-2012>