Delhi HC: Extracting Confession From Child Is Beyond Scope Of Preliminary Assessment Report and it is Unconstitutional

 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NGO/HAQ, Intervener in

the CRL.Ref. 3/2016 has placed before us, a copy of the preliminary

assessment report prepared by a psychologist in the format supplied by the

Department. Under Clause 3 of the said report, it can be clearly noted that

a confession is sought to be extracted from the child as to the manner in

which the offence was committed and the reasons thereof. This manner of

seeking a confession from the child is unconstitutional and beyond the scope

of a report of preliminary assessment to be prepared under Section 15 of the

J.J. Act.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CRL.A. 193/2018

VIKAS SANGWAN  Vs THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) 

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

Dated: 19.09.2022

1. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of NCPCR states that they are in

the process of consultation and he needs three months time to submit the

detail report in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the

decision reported as (2022) SCC OnLine SC 870 Barun Chandra Thakur

Vs. Master Bholu & Anr.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of DCPCR seeks eight weeks

time to furnish the report.

3. Besides the guidelines as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

relation to the report of preliminary assessment, we find that even the

questionnaire at Sl. Nos. 42 and 43 in Form No.6 which relates to

preparation of Social Investigation Report (in short SIR) for children in

conflict with law under Section 8 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and

Protection) of Children Act (in short, the J.J. Act) is incorrect as a

presumption is raised at the pre trial stage itself that the child has committed

the offence for the reason it note in Sl. No. 42. In compliance of the

requirement at Sl. No. 42 the Probation Officer is required to note the

alleged role of the child in the offence and at Sl. No.43 the reasons for the

said alleged offence. Most often, this SIR filled by the Probation Officer is

also considered and pertinent at the time of preparing the preliminary

assessment report under Section 15 of the J.J. Act.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the NGO/HAQ, Intervener in

the CRL.Ref. 3/2016 has placed before us, a copy of the preliminary

assessment report prepared by a psychologist in the format supplied by the

Department. Under Clause 3 of the said report, it can be clearly noted that

a confession is sought to be extracted from the child as to the manner in

which the offence was committed and the reasons thereof. This manner of

seeking a confession from the child is unconstitutional and beyond the scope

of a report of preliminary assessment to be prepared under Section 15 of the

J.J. Act.

5. Learned Amicus Curiae states that though the vires of Section 15 of

the J.J. Act were not in challenge before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the

decision in Barun Chandra Thakur (Supra), however, sufficient guidance

has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court with regard to manner of

conducting the inquiry giving three important factors; firstly, mental and

physical capacity of the CCL to commit an offence; secondly, the ability of

the CCL to understand the consequences of the offence and thirdly,

circumstances in which the accused allegedly committed the offence.

6. Though the record from the Court of learned ASJ has been received,

however the record from the learned Juvenile Justice Board has not been

received. Registry will call for the record of the Juvenile Justice Board in

sealed cover to this Court before the next date of hearing.

7. List for further hearing on 07th December, 2022.

8. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

MUKTA GUPTA, J

ANISH DAYAL, J

SEPTEMBER 19, 2022.

Print Page