Section 34 of THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN FROM SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT, 2012
Original Text
34. Procedure in case of commission of offence by child and determination of age by Special Court.
(1) Where any offence under this Act is committed by a child, such child shall be dealt with under the provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (2 of 2016).
(2) If any question arises in any proceeding before the Special Court whether a person is a child or not, such question shall be determined by the Special Court after satisfying itself about the age of such person and it shall record in writing its reasons for such determination.
(3) No order made by the Special Court shall be deemed to be invalid merely by any subsequent proof that the age of a person as determined by it under sub-section (2) was not the correct age of that person.
Visual Summary
Child as Offender
If the accused is a child (under 18), the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 applies, not the standard criminal procedure.
Age Determination
The Special Court has the authority to determine the age of the accused if disputed, recording reasons in writing.
Validity of Orders
Court orders remain valid even if new proof later shows the age determination was incorrect. This prevents procedural collapse.
Summary
Section 34 addresses a critical procedural aspect: what happens when the person accused of a sexual offence is themselves a child, or when there is confusion regarding the age of the accused.
1. Application of Juvenile Justice Act: If a child commits an offence under the POCSO Act, they cannot be tried as an adult. They must be treated according to the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. This ensures the focus remains on reform and rehabilitation rather than punishment.
2. Role of the Special Court: If there is a dispute about whether the accused is a child or an adult, the Special Court is empowered to make that decision. The Court must satisfy itself regarding the age and write down the specific reasons for its conclusion.
3. Protection of Judicial Proceedings: Sub-section (3) is a “saving clause.” It states that if a Court decides an age (e.g., treating someone as an adult), passes an order, and later it is proven the person was actually a different age, the original order does not automatically become invalid. This prevents cases from being thrown out on technicalities after a verdict is reached.
Key Takeaways
-
✓
Child in Conflict with Law: A child accused of a POCSO offence is processed via the Juvenile Justice Board, not the adult criminal court system. -
✓
Judicial Discretion: The Special Court is the authority to settle age disputes during proceedings. -
✓
Mandatory Recording: The Court must record written reasons for how it determined the age. -
✓
Finality of Orders: Subsequent proof of a different age does not retrospectively invalidate the Court’s previous orders.
Process Flowchart
Practice Questions
Q1. Under Section 34, which Act governs the procedure if the offence is committed by a child?
Show Answer
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Q2. Who has the authority to determine the age of the accused if a question arises during proceedings?
Show Answer
The Special Court.
Q3. If a Special Court determines an age, and later proof shows this age was incorrect, is the Court’s order invalid?
Show Answer
No, the order shall not be deemed invalid merely by subsequent proof of correct age.
Related Provisions
- Section 2(d): Definition of “Child” (person below 18 years).
- Section 28: Designation of Special Courts.
- Section 33: Procedure and powers of Special Court.
Conclusion
Section 34 acts as a crucial bridge between the POCSO Act and the Juvenile Justice Act. It recognizes that children can be perpetrators as well as victims, and ensures that child offenders are treated with the rehabilitation-focused approach of the juvenile system. Furthermore, by upholding the validity of orders despite subsequent age corrections, it ensures the stability and finality of judicial proceedings, preventing the misuse of age determination as a loophole to derail justice.