CHENNAI: Holding that the Borstal Schools Act has become outdated, as it was enacted in 1925 and it does not serve the purpose any more, Madras High Court has suggested to the State government to revisit the Act.
A specially constituted five-judge bench, which made the recommendation on August 29, also quashed a GO declaring all the sub-jails in the State as Borstal schools.
A Borstal school is an institution, in which offenders aged between 18 and 21 years are lodged and given training in various fields. They are subjected to disciplinary and moral influences for their reformation.
While so, a division bench passed an order directing all the Magistrates in the State to send all under-trial prisoners in the age group of 18 to 21 to Borstal schools. Unable to cope up with the sudden inflow of under-trial prisoners at the only borstal school at Pudukottai, the government by the GO dated August 12, 2008 notified all the sub-jails as borstal schools.
While so, another division bench heard a batch of Habeas Corpus writ petitions challenging the detention of juveniles and adolescents. As the issues involved various Acts, including the Borstal Schools Act, the matters were placed before the specially constituted five-judge bench.
Settling the issues raised, the special bench of Justices A Selvam, M Sathyanarayanan, B Rajendran, R Mala and PN Prakash said it was open to the Magistrates to remand the accused between the age group of 18 and 21 years straight to the prisons and not to Borstal schools.
It also overruled the judgment of a Full Bench of this High Court holding that the word ‘imprisonment’ in Section 8 of the Act included “imprisonment for life,” as it did not lay down the correct position in law and suggested to the government to repeal the entire Act since it has outlived its purpose.
The bench said the convicting court (be it original or appellate) is vested with the jurisdiction to act under Section 8 of the Act only upon convicting the accused and before passing its sentence. An order under this section could be passed by the Appellate/Revisional court, if the person had not crossed the age of 21 years on the date of judgment/order, subject to conduct of enquiry under Sections 8(2) and 11 of the Act.
Govt granted 4 wks to finalise Motor Vehicles Rules
Chennai: The first Bench of Madras High Court has granted four weeks to the State government to finalise the amended special rules of the TN Motor Vehicles (Regulation and Control of School Buses) Special Rules, 2012. If it was still not finalised in four weeks, the Transport Secretary would have to be present in the court on October 5, the Bench of Chief Justice SK Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan said on Wednesday. This follows a submission from the Advocate-General R Muthukumaraswamy that the matter had been sent to the government only on July 29 and prayed for four more weeks to finalise the rules. Originally, a batch of private schools moved the High Court assailing certain provisions of the 2012 special rules as “unconstitutional and discriminatory”. The issue cropped up after the death of Shruthi (7), a class 2 student of a private matriculation school in Selaiyur, who fell through a hole on the floor of her school bus and was crushed to death by the rear wheel of the bus on July 25, 2012.
Chartered accountant’s plea against cost accountant
Chennai: Justice M Sathyanarayana of the Madras High Court on Wednesday issued two weeks’ notice to the authorities concerned on a writ petition from chartered accountant M Venkara Siva Kumar. The petition prayed for a direction to cost accountants to strictly comply with Section 2(2) of the Cost and Works Accountants Act, 1959, and desist from encroaching on the domains earmarked for chartered accountants. According to petitioner, cost accountants shall use an acronym ICOAI instead of ICAI, which belongs to chartered accountants, as per an SC judgment in the Satyam Vs Sifynet case. “Cost account-ants, using their clout, are trying to include themselves in the definition of auditors in various Central and State legislations so as to claim the right to do services that are being rendered by chartered accountants now,” he said. A chartered accountant is a public authority as per the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. Cost accountant is a public authority established under Cost and Works Accountants Act, 1959.