ABDUL QADEER vs State Ss — 2025 PLD 326 ISLAMABAD

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ABDUL QADEER VS State Ss. 376(iii) & 377-B---Juvenile Justice System act (XXII of 2018), S. 9---anti-Rape (Investigation and Trial) act (XXX of 2021), Sched. II---Rape, unnatural offence---appreciation of evidence---Juvenility of the accused---Jurisdiction of Juvenile Court---Scope---accused was charged that he sexually abused the minor son of complainant---allegedly, accused was Juvenile at the time of committing the offence, thus his trial should be conducted by the Juvenile Court---Criminal case against a juvenile for the offences mentioned in Schedule II to the anti-Rape (Investigation and Trial) act, 2021 could competently be tried by a Juvenile Court---However, the same was not the situation if a Special Court established under the anti-Rape act tried a Juvenile Offender for an offence mentioned in the Schedules to the anti-Rape act, unless specifically designated under the provisions of Juvenile Justice System act, 2018---Question whether at the time of commission of offence, the appellant was able to perform the alleged criminal act to satisfy his lust remained unresolved as no effort was made by the prosecution to medically examine the appellant and place such material in evidence before the Trial Court---Sitting in appeal at this moment, the clock cannot be reversed to examine maturity of the appellant for the reason that determining 'maturity' of a person required consideration of multiple factors in real time during trial, which if not done promptly, coupled with negative report of the Chemical Examiner, created a presumption in favour of the appellant---If a juvenile was not tried within the Juvenile Court framework, the core purpose and intent of the Juvenile Justice System act, 2018, would be rendered ineffective---Such a decision would strip the juvenile of the protections and rights explicitly provided under the act---Moreover, Juvenile Offenders adjudicated in the adult criminal system were more likely to re-enter in the society as potential career criminals rather than rehabilitated members of the community---Special Court (GBV Court) established exclusively under the anti-Rape act did not have "the jurisdiction to try a Juvenile Offender, unless the said Court was specifically designated as Juvenile Court under the Juvenile act---Proceedings conducted by the Special Court (GBV Court) in the instant case being coram non judice were liable to be quashed and the impugned judgment being void was liable to be set-aside---However, the quashing of proceedings or setting-aside of the impugned judgment would not absolve the appellant from the criminal liability unless the matter was disposed of in accordance with the provisions of Juvenile act---In such circumstances, the instant appeal was partially allowed and the proceedings conducted during trial and impugned judgment were quashed---Matter was remanded with the direction that it shall be entrusted to a competent Juvenile Court for further proceedings.

ABDUL QADEER vs State Ss — 2025 PLD 326 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD