Section 86 JJ Act: Classification of offences and designated court

Section 86 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: Classification of offences and designated court

Official Bare Act Text

Override / Mandate Mens Rea (Intent) Actus Reus (Conduct) Punishment Limitation Monetary

(1) Where an offence under this Act is punishable with imprisonment for a term more than seven years, then such offence shall be cognizable, non-bailable and triable by a Children's Court.

(2) Where an offence under this Act is punishable with imprisonment for a term of three years and above, but not more than seven years, then such offence shall be non-cognizable, non-bailable and triable by a Magistrate of First Class.

(3) Where an offence, under this Act, is punishable with imprisonment for less than three years or with fine only, then such offence shall be non-cognizable and bailable and shall be triable by any Magistrate.

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 86

Section 86 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 classifies all offences under Chapter IX into petty, serious, and heinous categories and designates the competent criminal courts for trial.

Bail & Custodial Standards: Sub-section (1) provides that where an offence under this Act is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding seven years, it shall be cognizable, non-bailable, and triable by a Children's Court.
Sub-Section (2): First: Sub-section (2) directs that where an offence is punishable with imprisonment for three years and above, but not exceeding seven years, it shall be cognizable, non-bailable, and triable by a Magistrate of First Class.

Sub-section (3) provides that offences punishable with imprisonment for less than three years shall be non-cognizable and bailable, triable by any Magistrate. The statutory classification creates a clear procedural roadmap for investigating agencies and magistrates in registering FIRs and determining bail jurisdiction.

Key Landmark Precedents:

Shilpa Mittal v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2020) 2 SCC 787: The Supreme Court addressed the statutory gap in classification where an offence carries a maximum sentence of more than seven years but no minimum sentence is prescribed, ruling that such offences must be treated as 'serious offences' and cannot be classified as 'heinous' under Section 86.
Pawan Kumar v. State, 2021 SCC OnLine Del 5214: The High Court affirmed that the designated Children's Court or Sessions Court possesses exclusive jurisdiction over offences categorized as heinous under Section 86.

Legal Commentary:

Section 86 provides jurisdictional certainty across the spectrum of child abuse crimes. The Supreme Court's ruling in Shilpa Mittal established that ambiguous sentencing ranges must be construed strictly in favor of the accused juvenile, maintaining statutory coherence between Section 2(33), Section 15, and Section 86.

Section 86: Classification of offences and designated court

Section 86 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: Classification of offences and designated court

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 86