Juvenile offences cannot form the basis for subjective satisfaction in passing a preventive detention order.

In brief

The question

1. Whether criminal offences committed by a person while they were a juvenile (under 18 years of age) can be relied upon to form the subjective satisfaction required for a preventive detention order under the 1985 Act.

The court held

The Court held that a detention order based even partially on offences committed during the detenue's minority (unless falling under regulated exceptions) is illegal

It also directed

The Court answered the issue in the negative, quashed the detention order dated 11.12.2025, and ordered the immediate release of the detenue from Central Prison, Bellary, provided he was not required in any other case

01Facts

The petitioner, mother of the detenue (Abhicyrill @ Abhi), challenged a detention order dated 11.12.2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Kolar, under the Karnataka Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, Gamblers, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video or Audio Pirates Act, 1985 ("1985 Act")

pp. 3-4

The detention was based on ten criminal cases registered against the 19-year-old detenue between 2023 and 2025

pp. 5-6

The petitioner argued that several of these offences occurred when the detenue was a juvenile (under 18 years), and thus, pursuant to Section 24 of the JJ Act, they could not form the basis for a detention order

p. 4

02Issues

i.1. Whether criminal offences committed by a person while they were a juvenile (under 18 years of age) can be relied upon to form the subjective satisfaction required for a preventive detention order under the 1985 Act.

pp. 7 / para. 8-9

03Law Applied

Section 24 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 ("JJ Act"), which stipulates that a child who has committed an offence shall not suffer any disqualification attached to a conviction, notwithstanding any other law

p. 8

Section 2(12) of the JJ Act, defining a "child" as a person who has not completed 18 years of age

p. 7

The JJ Act is a beneficial legislation enacted under Article 15(3) of the Constitution of India to protect the human rights of children in alignment with international conventions

p. 9

The only exception to the removal of disqualification is under Section 19 of the JJ Act, where a child above 16 years is tried as an adult for a heinous offence

pp. 8-10

Provisions in the judgment · 27 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Section 2 Section 24 Section 19

Indian Penal Code, 1860 14 provisions

Section 302 Section 307 Section 323 Section 324 Section 353 Section 504 Section 506 Section 143 Section 144 Section 147 Section 148 Section 149 Section 224 Section 34

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 9 provisions

Section 109 Section 189 Section 190 Section 191 Section 324 Section 351 Section 352 Section 3 Section 5

Arms Act, 1959 Section 25

04Reasoning

The Court observed that the detenue was 19 years old at the time of the detention order, but many of the ten offences cited by the State—specifically those from 2023 and early 2024—were committed when the detenue was below 18 years of age

p. 7

The Court reasoned that the legislative intent of Section 24 of the JJ Act is to ensure that juvenile lapses do not result in lifelong legal disqualifications

p. 9

Since the detenue was not tried as an adult for heinous offences under the specific exceptions of the JJ Act, his juvenile record was legally protected from being used against him

pp. 9-10

The Court concluded that the inclusion of these juvenile offences in the grounds for detention vitiated the detaining authority's "subjective satisfaction," as it directly contravened the statutory protections afforded to minors

p. 10

05Holding

The Court held that a detention order based even partially on offences committed during the detenue's minority (unless falling under regulated exceptions) is illegal

p. 10

pp. 10-11

LawLens.Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF