The Children Act, 1974
The Children Act, 2013
Custody of Minor–
Considering the facts and circumstances- especially the facts that minor S.A.M.M. Zohaibuddin has already attained the age of almost 7 years and he is now residing along with his ailing elder brother in his father’s house and is being taken good care of by his father, grandfather and grandmother, we are inclined to allow the prayer of the leavepetitioner to retain the custody of his minor son S.A.M.M. Zohaibuddin till disposal of Family Suit. .....S.A.M.M. Mahbubuddin =VS= Laila Fatema, (Civil), 2017 (2)– [3 LM (AD) 468] ....View Full Judgment

In view of the definition of child as appearing in section 2(f) appellant Nasir ought to have been tried by Juvenile Court. Trial of child along with adult is forbidden by law. The trial of the appellant being held not by Juvenile Court is hit by want of jurisdiction Md Nasir Ahmed vs State 42 DLR (AD) 89

Child Witness
A child witness who is himself a victim of assaults by the assassins of his father and saw the accused persons killing him and he testifies in details before the Court about the occurrence and remains unshaken in the face of cross-examination is a competent witness and he can be safely relied upon. Forkan alias Farhad and another Vs. The State, 15 BLD (AD) 163

The Code of Criminal Procedure 1898—- Section 491—Judicial custody of minor girl— Father is legally entitled to her custody—
The father as lawful guardian is legally entitled to the custody of his minor daughter. The opinion of immature mind of a minor girl is immaterial. On the basis of the unwillingness of the girl, she can not be kept in judicial custody for indefinite period. Mongol Chandra Nandi (Sree) Vs. Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Home Ajjairs and others— 2, MLR(1997) (AD) 62.

Under this section it is for the ourt to consider whether a person charged with ai offence and brought before it for trial appears to be a child or not and then proceed accordingly. Abdul Munem Chowdhury @ Momen vs State 47 DLR (AD) 96.

Presumption and determination of age
Under Section 66 of the Children Act it is for the Court to consider whether a person charged with an offence and brought before it for trial appears to be a child or not and then to proceed accordingly.
In the instant case the learned Additional Sessions Judge observed that the age of the petitioner could not be less then 16 years. Hç also noticed that there was sign of interpolation in the registraiion card and the certificate issued from the school. The learned Sessions Judge did not rely on those documents. From the materials on record the learned Additional Sessions Judge found it difficult to hold the petitioner to be a child on the date of framing of charges. The learned trial Court committed no illegality. Abdul Munem Chowdhury alias Momen Vs. The State, 15 BLD (AD) 184

It provide that when it appears to the Court that a person charged with an offence is a child, the Court is required to direct an enquiry to ascertain the age of the accused. When an accused is above 16 years of age at the time of framing of the charge he is not entitled to get the benefit of the Children Act Bimal Das Vs. The State 14 BLD (AD) 218

Code of Criminal Procedure 1898— Section 491—
Custody of a minor girl-Determinattion of age of the victim—Acceptability of father's statement when supported by school certificate and opinion of Radiologist—
In a case for bail of a minor girl in judicial custody the High Court Division is not precluded from deciding the case on merit by reason of the order of the Appellate Division directing retaking of the girl to judicial custody arising out of adinterim matters. In deciding the age of the victim girl pending determination by the trial court during trial, the statement of the father when supported by the school certificate and the opinion of the Radiologist can well be accepted even in the face of different opinion of the Medical Board. High Court Division is not required to proceed with the hearing of the bail petition in the absence of the peititioner or his lawyer, but it needs to decide the criminal appeal or criminal r vision on merit even in the absence of. the appellant or the petitioner as the case may be. Basha Dev Chatterjee Vs. Umme Salma and another— 4, MLR (1999) (AD) 209.