In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court on Thursday ordered the immediate release of Hansraj, a murder convict from Uttar Pradesh, after holding that he was a juvenile at the time of the 1981 offence. The bench led by Justice Dipankar Datta, with Justice Augustine George Masih concurring, found that Hansraj’s nearly four-year incarceration violated the Juvenile Justice Act and his fundamental right to life.
Background
Hansraj was convicted along with five others for the murder of a man in Sultanpur on November 2, 1981. The Sessions Court in 1984 had acknowledged that Hansraj was 16 years old and sent him to a children’s home under the then Children’s Act, 1960.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Drops Contempt Case Against Former Tax Official Over 'Willful Disobedience' Allegation in Income Tax Stay Order Dispute
The High Court later acquitted all the accused in 2000, but the Supreme Court in 2009 reversed that acquittal and restored the conviction. Hansraj absconded soon after and was re-arrested only in May 2022. According to his custody certificate, he had spent nearly three years and ten months in jail.
Court’s Observations
The bench noted that Hansraj was only 12 years and 5 months old on the date of the incident-a fact already acknowledged in the earlier Supreme Court order. Despite this, he remained imprisoned far beyond the maximum period of three years allowed under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
“The petitioner’s liberty has been curtailed not in accordance with procedure established by law,” the court said, emphasizing that such prolonged custody was a clear violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.
The judges also pointed out that the Sessions Court’s original intention was to place Hansraj in a reformatory setting, not in prison, and that such a purpose “is no longer feasible now.” The bench criticised the State for failing to observe Section 24 of the 1960 Act, which prohibits joint trials of children with adult offenders.
Citing earlier rulings, including Pratap Singh v. State of Jharkhand and Vinod Katara v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the bench reaffirmed that the plea of juvenility can be raised “at any stage, even after final disposal,” and must be entertained by all courts.
“The object and purpose of the Juvenile Justice Act,” the bench noted, “is to extend reformative justice to children and to correct past procedural oversights that have deprived them of their lawful protection.”
Decision
Allowing the writ petition, the Supreme Court ordered Hansraj’s immediate release, declaring his detention illegal. The bench directed the Senior Superintendent of Central Jail, Varanasi, to act on a downloaded copy of the judgment without insisting on a certified one.
With this order, the court reaffirmed that justice cannot ignore the passage of time when a juvenile’s liberty is at stake - even four decades after the crime.
Case Title: Hansraj vs State of Uttar Pradesh
Case Type & Number: Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 340 of 2025
Date of Judgment: October 9, 2025
