'Confidentiality No Excuse': Tripura HC Upholds CCL's Right To Access Case Material Relied Upon By JJB While Deciding To Try Him As An Adult

The Tripura High Court recently affirmed the Child in Conflict with Law (CCL's) right to access preliminary assessment reports and related documents referenced by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) while deciding whether the CCL should be tried as an adult under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection) Act.

A bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh set aside the Children's Court's order, which had affirmed the Juvenile Justice Board's (JJB) decision to try the appellant-CCL as an adult. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision of Barun Chandra Thakur vs. Master Bholu and another, the High Court ruled that the CCL was denied a reasonable opportunity to present a defence, as crucial reports informing the JJB's decision were withheld from the Appellant.

“A reasonable opportunity to the CCL to defend himself or rebut the reports which include the Preliminary Assessment Report and the SIR on the basis of which the learned JJB has held him liable to be tried as an adult by the Children's Court for the alleged heinous offences stands denied in the eye of law. Such denial of reasonable opportunity goes to the root of the matter and vitiates the decision making process as far as the declaration of the CCL to be tried as an adult by the Children's Court under Section 15 of the Act is concerned.”, the court observed.

The court rejected the State's contention that confidentiality justified withholding documents considered by the JJB in deciding whether the CCL should be tried as an adult.

“The Apex Court has held that while maintaining confidentiality has a different purpose but in no case can it be said that to maintain confidentiality, the relevant material would not be provided to the child or his guardian or parents. It would be in complete contravention of the settled principles of criminal jurisprudence. Concept of confidentiality used in Section 99 is to prevent the reports from coming in public domain or shared in public. Its availability will be confined to the parties to the proceedings and the parties should also refrain from sharing it with third parties. Section 99(2) which begins with a non-obstante clause proceeds to direct that the victim should also not be denied access to the case report, orders and relevant papers. Once the legislature's intention is to provide material to the victim, there could never be an intention in the name of confidentiality to deny such access to the records to the child or his parents or guardians meaning thereby the child in conflict with law (CCL).”, the Court observed.

Consequently, the High Court remanded the case back to the JJB for a fresh preliminary assessment. The board has been directed to provide the CCL with all necessary reports and materials and to make a new determination within two months, adhering to the principles established in Barun Chandra.

Accordingly, the Appeal was allowed.

Case Title: "X" Vs. The State of Tripura

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Trip) 3

Click here to read/download the order

Appearances:

For Petitioner (s) : Mr. Subrata Sarkar, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Piyali Chakraborty, Advocate, Ms. Uttara Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, P.P., Mr. Rajib Saha, Addl. P.P.