Judicial Jurisprudence Unveiled: Children's Court Prevails Over Sessions Court in JJ Act Appeals, Decrees Supreme Court"

In a landmark verdict echoing through the legal corridors, the Supreme Court elucidated that appeals against the preliminary assessment orders of the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) under Section 101(2) of the JJ Act, 2015 shall find their abode before the enigmatic realm of the ‘Children’s Court’, should it stand in existence, even in the looming presence of the Sessions Court.

Crafting a labyrinth of interpretation from the tapestry of the JJ Act, 2025, and the Juvenile Justice Model Rules, 2016, the esteemed Bench, helmed by Justices CT Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal, traversed through the legal maze. They discerned that when the ethereal presence of the Children’s Court graces the legal landscape, it shall reign supreme. Even amidst the looming shadow of the Sessions Court, the appeal under Section 101(2) shall find its sanctuary within the precincts of the Children’s Court.

“In a harmonious symphony of statutory provisions, the lexicon of ‘Children’s Court’ and ‘Sessions Court’ ought to be perceived as interchangeable entities,” the judgment resonated. “Where the Children’s Court dances in existence, its jurisdiction supersedes, notwithstanding the ostensible appeal before the Sessions Court.”

Section 101(2) of the JJ Act, a parchment within the legal opus, delineates the pathway for appeals against the Board’s preliminary assessment orders under the benevolent gaze of the Court of Sessions. Yet, in the labyrinth of legal interpretation, the Court pronounced that the ‘Children’s Court’ shall ascend to prominence, where its presence graces the legal landscape.

“The tale woven by the JJ Act in Section 2(20) baptizes the ‘Children’s Court’ as a sacred sanctum, anointed by the 2005 Act or the 2012 Act,” the court deliberated. “In its absence, the Court of Sessions shall inherit the mantle of jurisdiction. Thus, the Presiding Officer of the Children’s Court and the Sessions Court find themselves enshrined within the same pantheon.”

Echoes from the judgment resound, casting light upon the intricacies of legal jurisdiction, as the Supreme Court weaves its narrative through the corridors of justice.